6 ms·

But not Waymo. Which confirms all my personal biases. More seriously, the statement cites four specific clauses that caused the permit to be suspended. The sec

But not Waymo. Which confirms all my personal biases. More seriously, the statement cites four specific clauses that caused the permit to be suspended. The second one seems really interesting as it implies that there was a lie of omission where the others are more or less what I’d expect regarding safety risks: > Today’s suspensions are based on the following: > 13 CCR §228.20 (b) (6) – Based upon the performance of the vehicles, the Department determines the manufacturer’s vehicles are not safe for the public’s operation. > 13 CCR §228.20 (b) (3) – The manufacturer has misrepresented any information related to safety of the autonomous technology of its vehicles. > 13 CCR §227.42 (b) (5) – Any act or omission of the manufacturer or one of its agents, employees, contractors, or designees which the department finds makes the conduct of autonomous vehicle testing on public roads by the manufacturer an unreasonable risk to the public. > 13 CCR §227.42 (c) – The department shall immediately suspend or revoke the Manufacturer’s Testing Permit or a Manufacturer’s Testing Permit – Driverless Vehicles if a manufacturer is engaging in a practice in such a manner that immediate suspension is required for the safety of persons on a public road.

yegle 3y ago
> "The AV braked aggressively before impact and because it detected a collision, it attempted to pull over to avoid further safety issues," Cruise added. "When the AV tried to pull over, it continued before coming to a final stop, pulling the pedestrian forward. Our thoughts continue to be with the victim as we hope for a rapid and complete recovery." This looks like Cruise's fault, dragging a pedestrian while pulling over for "safety"?
- _ea1k 3y ago
  Yes, and it sounds like a fairly fundamental flaw. Does the car have sensors that can determine pulling over is the wrong thing to do in this situation? In general, getting out of the way is the right course of action, but this clearly shows that there are exceptions. I'm not sure that the vehicles are currently equipped for differentiating to even be possible.
  - WesternWind 3y ago
    Can the car detect screams of pain? Because I as a driver can.
    - _ea1k 3y ago
      It should be able to, but what if the person was unconscious? As a human, we'd detect this in other ways. I'd expect the car to use cameras and sensors.
  - rob74 3y ago
    In case of a serious accident, especially one where a person has come to harm, not blocking traffic shouldn't be the main concern anymore IMHO...
    - _ea1k 3y ago
      Agreed, and regardless of state after impact, it should have been able to determine that someone had been hurt by the collision. That might be the fix in this case, just hard stop for all cases of pedestrian impact.
    - fudged71 3y ago
      A human driver (and owner of the vehicle) would get out to assess the damage. So in the absence… Remain where you are until a trained professional gives you directions. Fire/police/ambulance should have some way to direct the vehicle.
- mariusmg 3y ago
  >This looks like Cruise's fault Imagine having to write the code that "detects" if a pedestrain is caught underneath the car
  - mumblemumble 3y ago
    It's not clear to me that this is purely a software problem; it might be a "the car doesn't even have the sensors necessary to detect this kind of situation" problem. It could also be a "the software can't anticipate that this would be happening the way a human can because it doesn't have object permanence" problem. That's probably at least part of how a human would do it. But I have a suspicion that we're very, very far away from being able to get computers to do that in any sort of reliable way. So I'm guessing we're probably looking at specialized sensors if we want to handle this kind of situation appropriately. Basically some sort of self-driving car equivalent of a human driver getting out of the car to check and make sure everything's OK.
    - marcosdumay 3y ago
      I would be surprised if it turns out that those self-driving cars don't have object permanence. Making things move around without a physical model looks like a really nasty infinite bug-breeder.
      - FireBeyond 3y ago
        For the longest time, at least the visual representation of trains at a level crossing strongly implied challenges around object permanence for Tesla. I will say that I recognize that the visual representation may not be a 1:1 (in fact quite certainly isn't) mapping of the computer's "world view". But it was quite ridiculous and definitely disconcerting seeing a level crossing with a train going through it and seeing the Tesla I was in acting like there was a traffic light that was erratically going red, while dozens of semi trucks flickered in and out of existence across the screen in front of me.
        marcosdumay 3y ago
notatoad 3y ago
yeah, they seem to be pretty clearly saying Cruise tried to cover something up here. i'd love to know more about that.
- londons_explore 3y ago
  See the pinned comment at the top. Seems they showed an official only half the video of what happened, and neglected to show the other half which showed the stopped vehicle start moving again with the victim still under the car.
  - notatoad 3y ago
    thanks... yeah, that's a pretty blatantly terrible cover up, definitely not the sort of behaviour you'd want from a company who's allowed to test experimental tech on public roads.
danielmarkbruce 3y ago
What biases? Are you saying you expected Waymo to be better than Cruise?
- eep_social 3y ago
  > expected Waymo to be better than Cruise? Yes, very much so. In previous discussions Waymo and Cruise were typically lumped together — “self driving bad” — usually by the original article even! However, my personal experience both as rider and as former Google employee says that Waymo is holding itself to a higher standard and therefore having higher order problems. That’s a lot of nuance for a flame-y topic but this permit revocation is rather unambiguous and I am having a smidge of schadenfreude as a result. Edit: There are dozens of us https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38003860 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38003860
  - danielmarkbruce 3y ago
    It's fair, I had the same sense (and am also former google) and wondered if I was the only one. It always seemed crazy to me to lump Waymo and Cruise together, but I never had a water tight argument for why.
nickvec 3y ago
Waymo is leagues ahead of Cruise wrt their AV tech. Saying otherwise as your post is implying is borderline misinformation.
- eep_social 3y ago
  I have the same sense but even in this discussion I see one angry comment about, “those companies” that doesn’t seem to distinguish among Waymo, Cruise, and (in context, I think) also Tesla.
nojvek 3y ago
People intentionally or unintentionally get under trains and get killed. Train service in many countries continues to function. The thing about trains is the rails are only made for trains. I don’t think it is a good idea to mix human and machine driven cars, especially in city roads where there are cyclists, pedestrians, trucks. I would love to see AV only lanes restricted to geofenced parts of the cities.

yegle 3y ago

> "The AV braked aggressively before impact and because it detected a collision, it attempted to pull over to avoid further safety issues," Cruise added. "When the AV tried to pull over, it continued before coming to a final stop, pulling the pedestrian forward. Our thoughts continue to be with the victim as we hope for a rapid and complete recovery." This looks like Cruise's fault, dragging a pedestrian while pulling over for "safety"?

_ea1k 3y ago
Yes, and it sounds like a fairly fundamental flaw. Does the car have sensors that can determine pulling over is the wrong thing to do in this situation? In general, getting out of the way is the right course of action, but this clearly shows that there are exceptions. I'm not sure that the vehicles are currently equipped for differentiating to even be possible.
- WesternWind 3y ago
  Can the car detect screams of pain? Because I as a driver can.
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    It should be able to, but what if the person was unconscious? As a human, we'd detect this in other ways. I'd expect the car to use cameras and sensors.
- rob74 3y ago
  In case of a serious accident, especially one where a person has come to harm, not blocking traffic shouldn't be the main concern anymore IMHO...
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    Agreed, and regardless of state after impact, it should have been able to determine that someone had been hurt by the collision. That might be the fix in this case, just hard stop for all cases of pedestrian impact.
  - fudged71 3y ago
    A human driver (and owner of the vehicle) would get out to assess the damage. So in the absence… Remain where you are until a trained professional gives you directions. Fire/police/ambulance should have some way to direct the vehicle.
mariusmg 3y ago
>This looks like Cruise's fault Imagine having to write the code that "detects" if a pedestrain is caught underneath the car
- mumblemumble 3y ago
  It's not clear to me that this is purely a software problem; it might be a "the car doesn't even have the sensors necessary to detect this kind of situation" problem. It could also be a "the software can't anticipate that this would be happening the way a human can because it doesn't have object permanence" problem. That's probably at least part of how a human would do it. But I have a suspicion that we're very, very far away from being able to get computers to do that in any sort of reliable way. So I'm guessing we're probably looking at specialized sensors if we want to handle this kind of situation appropriately. Basically some sort of self-driving car equivalent of a human driver getting out of the car to check and make sure everything's OK.
  - marcosdumay 3y ago
    I would be surprised if it turns out that those self-driving cars don't have object permanence. Making things move around without a physical model looks like a really nasty infinite bug-breeder.
    - FireBeyond 3y ago
      For the longest time, at least the visual representation of trains at a level crossing strongly implied challenges around object permanence for Tesla. I will say that I recognize that the visual representation may not be a 1:1 (in fact quite certainly isn't) mapping of the computer's "world view". But it was quite ridiculous and definitely disconcerting seeing a level crossing with a train going through it and seeing the Tesla I was in acting like there was a traffic light that was erratically going red, while dozens of semi trucks flickered in and out of existence across the screen in front of me.
      - marcosdumay 3y ago

notatoad 3y ago

yeah, they seem to be pretty clearly saying Cruise tried to cover something up here. i'd love to know more about that.

londons_explore 3y ago
See the pinned comment at the top. Seems they showed an official only half the video of what happened, and neglected to show the other half which showed the stopped vehicle start moving again with the victim still under the car.
- notatoad 3y ago
  thanks... yeah, that's a pretty blatantly terrible cover up, definitely not the sort of behaviour you'd want from a company who's allowed to test experimental tech on public roads.

danielmarkbruce 3y ago

What biases? Are you saying you expected Waymo to be better than Cruise?

eep_social 3y ago
> expected Waymo to be better than Cruise? Yes, very much so. In previous discussions Waymo and Cruise were typically lumped together — “self driving bad” — usually by the original article even! However, my personal experience both as rider and as former Google employee says that Waymo is holding itself to a higher standard and therefore having higher order problems. That’s a lot of nuance for a flame-y topic but this permit revocation is rather unambiguous and I am having a smidge of schadenfreude as a result. Edit: There are dozens of us https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38003860 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38003860
- danielmarkbruce 3y ago
  It's fair, I had the same sense (and am also former google) and wondered if I was the only one. It always seemed crazy to me to lump Waymo and Cruise together, but I never had a water tight argument for why.

nickvec 3y ago

Waymo is leagues ahead of Cruise wrt their AV tech. Saying otherwise as your post is implying is borderline misinformation.

eep_social 3y ago
I have the same sense but even in this discussion I see one angry comment about, “those companies” that doesn’t seem to distinguish among Waymo, Cruise, and (in context, I think) also Tesla.

nojvek 3y ago

People intentionally or unintentionally get under trains and get killed. Train service in many countries continues to function. The thing about trains is the rails are only made for trains. I don’t think it is a good idea to mix human and machine driven cars, especially in city roads where there are cyclists, pedestrians, trucks. I would love to see AV only lanes restricted to geofenced parts of the cities.