3 ms·
This seems pretty tame to me. It's exactly the sort of failure when testing this tech I'd like to see. "Cars blocked traffic for some reason" is way better than
by beej71 4y ago
This seems pretty tame to me. It's exactly the sort of failure when testing this tech I'd like to see. "Cars blocked traffic for some reason" is way better than cars hitting people.
I'm impressed it works as well as it already does, and I'm looking forward to more bugs getting worked out.
- joshribakoff 4y agoBlocking traffic isn’t something I’d like to see when I or someone else needs emergency vehicles to get to them. It is also unnecessary if the companies have a safety driver who can take over, or more robust teleoperation for a human to remotely assist
- reidjs 4y agoIf you’ve ever been to NYC you will see human drivers block emergency vehicles all the time on purpose, even when they are blaring sirens. I have way more confidence in one of these driverless cars to gtfo out of the way of a firetruck than your average Uber driver who’s hustling for a few extra bucks.
- nacs 4y agoThese Cruise cars didn't have anyone in them at all. No company should be running "experiments" like this on a public road with a 5000+ lb vehicle.
- beej71 4y agoAt some point, if the tech were ever to be used, it would have to be on a public road. And at that point we'd certainly see some bugs that hadn't been exposed on closed course testing. (Are those cars really 5000 lbs? They seem small for that, but point taken.)