3 ms·

Example: a truck stops in front of the autodriving car, too quickly for it to stop in time. Not sure if it matters for your example, but if that happens to a h

by narag 3y ago

Example: a truck stops in front of the autodriving car, too quickly for it to stop in time. Not sure if it matters for your example, but if that happens to a human, it's his fault for not keeping a safe following distance. It could also be the truck's driver fault if the sudden stop is not justified, but in the case of the robot, it should be programmed to keep the distance.

c0pium 3y ago
(As of now) You’re being downvoted by people who don’t leave enough following room on the highway. This is however the correct answer. Collisions need to be avoided by assuming others will do stupid things. Because they will.
- tivert 3y ago
  However, I wouldn't be surprised of some technologist has been hyping self-driving technology as a way to achieve a magic utopia by increasing efficiency by getting rid of those kinds of safeguards (e.g.) safe following distance), because machines are perfect won't make mistakes. After all, once we get rid of those pesky humans, shouldn't cars be able to barrel down the highway at 100mph with the following distance of stop-and-go traffic, because of the magic of internet and algorithms?
JoeAltmaier 3y ago
Perhaps the truck hit something else and stopped very abruptly. You can be part of a multi-car accident; happens all the time. Regardless of fault there's the issue of programming are response, which was the point here.
- narag 3y ago
  I agree, but if I understood correctly your previous reasoning, the passengers of the robotic vehicle put themselves 'in the game', not only more than roadside bystanders, but also more than others in vehicles that are driven respecting the rules. I used to drive to work every day, very busy highway, and faced an annoying dilemma. If I kept a safe distance, the driver immediately behind me would pass me inserting himself in the gap, forcing me to brake and leaving more distance, inviting a new vehicle to pass me. Or I could tailgate and risk being part of the next multiple colision accident. After seen a couple of those, no thanks. This is the kind of human idiocy that robots were suppossed to avoid. But if they're going to mimic it, what's the point? We will be competing with them and sooner than later, we will see how big companies behind them will outmanouver us, also in courts. So not as optimistic as you about regulation.
  - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
    It's impossible to have a completely safe following distance. Some off-road hazard can inject itself onto the road without notice. All vehicles would be creeping along the freeway if they wanted perfect safety from such events. So we can only trust in probability and do the best we can. Robot or human, same issue.
    - narag 3y ago
      "Safe" is a simplification, but some practices are obviously wrong, like less than the length of two vehicles at 120 kmH. Some off-road hazard can inject itself onto the road without notice. All vehicles would be creeping along the freeway if they wanted perfect safety from such events. That's a tricky reasoning line. Safe distance is not intended for those cases. The point is that, given a colision, it won't be propagated. About congestion, it doesn't seem a problem if you can drive fast enough to make an issue of keeping the distance. Bottlenecks come mostly from exits.

by narag 3y ago

c0pium 3y ago

(As of now) You’re being downvoted by people who don’t leave enough following room on the highway. This is however the correct answer. Collisions need to be avoided by assuming others will do stupid things. Because they will.

tivert 3y ago
However, I wouldn't be surprised of some technologist has been hyping self-driving technology as a way to achieve a magic utopia by increasing efficiency by getting rid of those kinds of safeguards (e.g.) safe following distance), because machines are perfect won't make mistakes. After all, once we get rid of those pesky humans, shouldn't cars be able to barrel down the highway at 100mph with the following distance of stop-and-go traffic, because of the magic of internet and algorithms?

JoeAltmaier 3y ago

Perhaps the truck hit something else and stopped very abruptly. You can be part of a multi-car accident; happens all the time. Regardless of fault there's the issue of programming are response, which was the point here.

narag 3y ago
I agree, but if I understood correctly your previous reasoning, the passengers of the robotic vehicle put themselves 'in the game', not only more than roadside bystanders, but also more than others in vehicles that are driven respecting the rules. I used to drive to work every day, very busy highway, and faced an annoying dilemma. If I kept a safe distance, the driver immediately behind me would pass me inserting himself in the gap, forcing me to brake and leaving more distance, inviting a new vehicle to pass me. Or I could tailgate and risk being part of the next multiple colision accident. After seen a couple of those, no thanks. This is the kind of human idiocy that robots were suppossed to avoid. But if they're going to mimic it, what's the point? We will be competing with them and sooner than later, we will see how big companies behind them will outmanouver us, also in courts. So not as optimistic as you about regulation.
- JoeAltmaier 3y ago
  It's impossible to have a completely safe following distance. Some off-road hazard can inject itself onto the road without notice. All vehicles would be creeping along the freeway if they wanted perfect safety from such events. So we can only trust in probability and do the best we can. Robot or human, same issue.
  - narag 3y ago
    "Safe" is a simplification, but some practices are obviously wrong, like less than the length of two vehicles at 120 kmH. Some off-road hazard can inject itself onto the road without notice. All vehicles would be creeping along the freeway if they wanted perfect safety from such events. That's a tricky reasoning line. Safe distance is not intended for those cases. The point is that, given a colision, it won't be propagated. About congestion, it doesn't seem a problem if you can drive fast enough to make an issue of keeping the distance. Bottlenecks come mostly from exits.