3 ms·

They lied to the DMV, that alone is enough to ban them.

by lokar 3y ago

ToucanLoucan 3y ago
Seriously! This! This times a thousand! I get that technology is cool and we love seeing stuff like autonomous cars (and to be clear, where I live, I would say they should be the default because holy shit can people not drive here) but like, this is just not okay. Cruise's cars have a well documented history of disrupting traffic, and additionally, they have been found to: - Not be forthcoming with authorities on releasing information/video - Be misrepresenting the performance of their vehicles to the authorities This is just not acceptable for a company to be doing. This is not how we disrupt industries. You cannot "fake it till you make it" with road safety when building vehicles that traverse roads safely is your business' entire raison d'etre! That's just unacceptable, full stop. And, add to it, Cruise has been given a direct and clear path to resuming operations, which essentially boils down to doing the thing they should've been doing already. Like come on! How much more benevolent can we ask a regulator to be in this scenario? One could argue, frankly, that they're being too kid gloves about a company lying to an organization who's primary goal is ensuring safety about safety!
zestyping 3y ago
What was the lie?
- fudged71 3y ago
  Lie by omission
- oldgradstudent 3y ago
  They showed a video of the crash without the part where they dragged the pedestrian for 20 feet, claiming it was the full video of the incident. The DMV was not aware of that until notified by another government agency that was investigating the incident.
  - zestyping 3y ago
    Holy shit. Someone needs to get put in prison for this. Others get locked away for far less.
phatskat 3y ago
One problem is that the state taught them that it’s ok to lie, or at least that it’s ok to omit the full details. During the certification process for these self-driving cars, incidents of the cars “misbehaving” (for lack of a better term) were supposed to be reported. However, if a human driver intervened, then it didn’t count as the car itself making a poor choice. Example: self-driving car approaches an intersection clipping a reasonable speed and the light turns yellow. While a human driver would understand that it’s better to go through than to slam their brakes, the self-driving cat goes “yellow means red soon, stop now”. The human driver overrides and floors it through the intersection. Had the car stopped, that would’ve been a mark against the autonomous system. But since a human intervened, it doesn’t “count”. This is a good watch on the state of self-driving cars and how policy makers have largely just said “eh, fuck it” in places like SF. https://youtu.be/pmGOjHi-7MM https://youtu.be/pmGOjHi-7MM

They lied to the DMV, that alone is enough to ban them.

by lokar 3y ago

They lied to the DMV, that alone is enough to ban them.

Seriously! This! This times a thousand! I get that technology is cool and we love seeing stuff like autonomous cars (and to be clear, where I live, I would say they should be the default because holy shit can people not drive here) but like, this is just not okay. Cruise's cars have a well documented history of disrupting traffic, and additionally, they have been found to: - Not be forthcoming with authorities on releasing information/video - Be misrepresenting the performance of their vehicles to the authorities This is just not acceptable for a company to be doing. This is not how we disrupt industries. You cannot "fake it till you make it" with road safety when building vehicles that traverse roads safely is your business' entire raison d'etre! That's just unacceptable, full stop. And, add to it, Cruise has been given a direct and clear path to resuming operations, which essentially boils down to doing the thing they should've been doing already. Like come on! How much more benevolent can we ask a regulator to be in this scenario? One could argue, frankly, that they're being too kid gloves about a company lying to an organization who's primary goal is ensuring safety about safety!

zestyping 3y ago

What was the lie?

fudged71 3y ago
Lie by omission
oldgradstudent 3y ago
They showed a video of the crash without the part where they dragged the pedestrian for 20 feet, claiming it was the full video of the incident. The DMV was not aware of that until notified by another government agency that was investigating the incident.
- zestyping 3y ago
  Holy shit. Someone needs to get put in prison for this. Others get locked away for far less.

phatskat 3y ago

One problem is that the state taught them that it’s ok to lie, or at least that it’s ok to omit the full details. During the certification process for these self-driving cars, incidents of the cars “misbehaving” (for lack of a better term) were supposed to be reported. However, if a human driver intervened, then it didn’t count as the car itself making a poor choice. Example: self-driving car approaches an intersection clipping a reasonable speed and the light turns yellow. While a human driver would understand that it’s better to go through than to slam their brakes, the self-driving cat goes “yellow means red soon, stop now”. The human driver overrides and floors it through the intersection. Had the car stopped, that would’ve been a mark against the autonomous system. But since a human intervened, it doesn’t “count”. This is a good watch on the state of self-driving cars and how policy makers have largely just said “eh, fuck it” in places like SF. https://youtu.be/pmGOjHi-7MM https://youtu.be/pmGOjHi-7MM