3 ms·

Will California ban all human drivers next? After all, the pedestrian was first hit by a human driver, and was probably the but for cause.

HDThoreaun 3y ago
the Cruise dragged her 20 feet and rolled over her leg though. Obviously this is mainly the other drivers fault, but self driving cars need to be able to react properly to unexpected scenarios. A reasonable human driver would not have continued driving with a person trapped under the car.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  Yeah. This is essentially a safety recall; that behavior needs to be fixed.
_ea1k 3y ago
No, because fixing all humans is impossible. Fixing all Cruise vehicles so that this doesn't happen might be hard, but it isn't impossible.
- vel0city 3y ago
  > fixing all humans is impossible Sounds like a good argument to ban almost all human drivers.
mumblemumble 3y ago
I think that a suspension pending investigation and possible remediation is appropriate. I realize assuming this is the California DMV's line of reasoning is speculation, but this sentence from Cruise's own public statement on the event really does it for me (emphasis mine): > The AV detected a collision, bringing the vehicle to a stop; then attempted to pull over to avoid causing further road safety issues, pulling the individual forward approximately 20 feet. The tricky thing about these vehicles' control software is that it has absolutely no judgment or common sense. That's really on display here, where the vehicle immediately goes into a canned program instead of following a course of action that takes into account all the details of the situation in which it found itself, not just the ones that its creators had anticipated. That doesn't necessarily mean that testing self-driving cars on the roads is inherently irresponsible, but it does mean that the ground rules for how we manage such programs need to be tailored to the situation. What we have here is a situation where a rather nasty software defect has been discovered. We can assume that this defect is present in all of the vehicles Cruise is operating on public roadways. It is therefore reasonable and prudent to temporarily suspend autonomous testing operations on public roadways pending analysis and remediation. Because, let me emphasize again, TESTING. Pausing to analyze and iterate when you find problems is an essential part of testing. It's arguably the main thing that distinguishes testing from just YOLOing shit into production.
dv_dt 3y ago
If an individual driver did what the cruise vehicle did, then I would expect a suspended license during investigation. It just happens the AI diver is the singular “driver” for an entire fleet.
nonameiguess 3y ago
Commenters like this understand that doing a hit-and-run does result in a human losing their license, right? We don't revoke all human licenses because humans are unique individuals, not a hive mind controlled by a shared common program. Similarly, the DMV is not revoking the license for all self-driving cars. It's only revoking Cruise.

HDThoreaun 3y ago

the Cruise dragged her 20 feet and rolled over her leg though. Obviously this is mainly the other drivers fault, but self driving cars need to be able to react properly to unexpected scenarios. A reasonable human driver would not have continued driving with a person trapped under the car.

ceejayoz 3y ago
Yeah. This is essentially a safety recall; that behavior needs to be fixed.

_ea1k 3y ago

No, because fixing all humans is impossible. Fixing all Cruise vehicles so that this doesn't happen might be hard, but it isn't impossible.

vel0city 3y ago
> fixing all humans is impossible Sounds like a good argument to ban almost all human drivers.

mumblemumble 3y ago

I think that a suspension pending investigation and possible remediation is appropriate. I realize assuming this is the California DMV's line of reasoning is speculation, but this sentence from Cruise's own public statement on the event really does it for me (emphasis mine): > The AV detected a collision, bringing the vehicle to a stop; then attempted to pull over to avoid causing further road safety issues, pulling the individual forward approximately 20 feet. The tricky thing about these vehicles' control software is that it has absolutely no judgment or common sense. That's really on display here, where the vehicle immediately goes into a canned program instead of following a course of action that takes into account all the details of the situation in which it found itself, not just the ones that its creators had anticipated. That doesn't necessarily mean that testing self-driving cars on the roads is inherently irresponsible, but it does mean that the ground rules for how we manage such programs need to be tailored to the situation. What we have here is a situation where a rather nasty software defect has been discovered. We can assume that this defect is present in all of the vehicles Cruise is operating on public roadways. It is therefore reasonable and prudent to temporarily suspend autonomous testing operations on public roadways pending analysis and remediation. Because, let me emphasize again, TESTING. Pausing to analyze and iterate when you find problems is an essential part of testing. It's arguably the main thing that distinguishes testing from just YOLOing shit into production.

dv_dt 3y ago

If an individual driver did what the cruise vehicle did, then I would expect a suspended license during investigation. It just happens the AI diver is the singular “driver” for an entire fleet.

nonameiguess 3y ago

Commenters like this understand that doing a hit-and-run does result in a human losing their license, right? We don't revoke all human licenses because humans are unique individuals, not a hive mind controlled by a shared common program. Similarly, the DMV is not revoking the license for all self-driving cars. It's only revoking Cruise.