4 ms·
This article does not have enough information about the base rate. It is impossible to assess this situation without knowing how often do human drivers get in t
by roenxi 3y ago
This article does not have enough information about the base rate. It is impossible to assess this situation without knowing how often do human drivers get in the way of emergency service vehicles.
- Teever 3y agoAre you going to care about some base rate when it's your loved one dying?
- taeric 3y agoIf the new rate is better than the old base rate, the point is that we could be making progress?
- CaptainNegative 3y agoYes? Please don't make us pull out the model trolley set again.
- ozfive 3y agoUsername checks out.
- RheingoldRiver 3y agowell...yes? For example: wouldn't you be more upset if a collision was caused by a drunk driver than by a driver who was paying attention? That's because drunk drivers are known to be dangerous and should not be operating. If self-driving vehicles overall increase safety, then I am not as upset as I am if they are known to overall decrease safety, because the fact of their presence being just or unjust is pertinent to the case.
- afiori 3y agoIt depends on whose safety is increased and decreased. Car infrastructure is notorious for focusing on the safety of drivers rather than pedestrians. If self-driving cars increase safety for drivers and are worse for everybody else I am not sure it is a good trade-off. In this regard we can adapt the saying about electric cars to self-driving cars: they are here to save the car industry not you.
- searealist 3y agoIs your argument that only perfection should be acceptable for change?
- SpicyLemonZest 3y agoThe question is whether it should come up at all. If my ambulance takes a while to nudge its way through some crowded traffic at a busy intersection, would anyone think to tell my family that poor urban design and a lack of roundabouts contributed to my death?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ummonk 3y agoWhile parked or double parked cars can get in the way of emergency service vehicles (that seems to have been the case here with an unoccupied police car contributing to the blockage together with the two Cruise cars), in most cases human drivers will be in the car and can generally be cleared out with the use of a siren. As to Cruise cars themselves, it's been happening often enough that SF emergency services have been repeatedly complaining about it. In defense of Cruise though, the pedestrian that died here was struck by a human-driven vehicle, and presumably such pedestrian strikes would be a lot less common if human drivers were replaced by Cruise cars.
- hrunt 3y agoYes, all these stopped and immovable Cruise cars would certainly be safer for pedestrians than moving human-driven cars.
- cramjabsyn 3y agoThe good news is that after replacing the human drivers with cruise cars the number of cruise cars struck by cruise cars would be at an all time low.
- JellyBeanThief 3y agoThat's simply not a defense of Cruise. How things work in a hypothetical universe doesn't absolve them of how things worked in this universe. It's a self-driving car. One of the things it should be able to do is move out of the way. The conversation we should be having is how to give emergency responders the ability to move the car on their own. From a technical stand point, that's no problem at all. From a security stand point, it's a moderately difficult problem. From a civil rights stand point, it's a very difficult problem.
- roenxi 3y ago> in most cases human drivers will be in the car and can generally be cleared out with the use of a siren. vs. > Two autonomous Cruise vehicles and an empty San Francisco police vehicle were blocking the only exits from the scene from the article (ie, humans at 50% of the danger of autonomous vehicles, having selected from an article that may be a hit piece on autonomous vehicles). The base rate for human-driven vehicles blocking ingresses and egresses is probably quite high. I've seen ambulances with sirens blaring stuck in traffic. It just can't be that uncommon. Even before worrying about what madness the low-end of human drivers are capable of.
- MattPalmer1086 3y agoWhat we do know is that these self driving cars apparently have no way to get out of the way of emergency vehicles. That's something that should be addressed.
- someonehere 3y agoThat’s not a relevant comparison. The article is about Cruise cars that stop dead in their tracks with nobody able to physically move the car and blocking an exit path (several minutes +} You’re bringing up a comparison of someone who may delay the responders from getting to their destination by seconds. A human in a car can and will often move within seconds. Autonomous cars are stopping dead in their tracks. A first responder should be able to take control of that vehicle and move it. But they can’t. So they’re stuck.
- roenxi 3y ago> A human in a car can and will often move within seconds. Literally the situation in the article has a human-operated car that was blocking the ambulance. There were 3 cars, 2x automated and one human-controlled. I suspect the human-controlled one did not move in seconds or they wouldn't be talking about delays being a factor in this tragic loss of life. The fact that you didn't pick that up is what makes me think the article is a hit piece.
- dekhn 3y agoInformation about base rates make it hard to perpetuate the narrative.