3 ms·

The cruise vehicle (and some of the tesla features) are clearly not ready for the open road. As a bystander to them, I have pictures of those cars making mistak

The cruise vehicle (and some of the tesla features) are clearly not ready for the open road. As a bystander to them, I have pictures of those cars making mistakes that my unlicensed 14-year-old would never make. And not only in exceptional circumstances but fairly normal ones. A recent tesla incident I witnessed made me wonder if my robot vacuum cleaner has better pathfinding than the Tesla. So, the regulators must build a more rigorous testing/scoring system before these systems are allowed on the open road without a human minder. The existing ones designed for humans have many assumptions about human behavior built into them that clearly makes it unsuitable for nonhuman drivers.

paxys 3y ago
Completely agree. Living and driving around SF over the last couple of years it's very clear that Waymo is the only one that meets the bare minimum standard of being allowed to operate on public roads, and they are also the one with the least number of cars on the road and most limited routes. Regardless of how many years and billions of dollars that have been poured into the space, it is not anywhere close to ready for prime time.
HankB99 3y ago
> more rigorous testing/scoring system before these systems are allowed on the open road It never occurred to me that the AIs driving these vehicles should be tested, but that makes absolute sense. I wonder what tests these systems must pass before allowed on the road. I remind that it's important that the vehicles do better than human drivers and sadly that's a pretty low bar. I hope we aren't evaluating this primarily by counting deaths, injuries and property damage and comparing between the two.
- avar 3y ago
  We already have driving tests, have them pass those, and if those tests aren't stringent enough then the tests need fixing, for humans and robots alike.
  - thfuran 3y ago
    I'm not convinced that the tests should be the same. A human and a computer aren't the same thing, so why must they be assessed the same way?
    - Teever 3y ago
      Because it's not about the thing that's doing, it's about the thing that's being done.
      - thfuran 3y ago
        But it is about the thing that's doing. A test is designed with assumptions and knowledge about the thing under test. That two systems perform the same on a test doesn't necessarily mean that they will perform the same out of band, so unless the test is exactingly and comprehensively covering the totality of desired behavior/functionality, two fundamentally very different systems may best be tested with two different tests.
  - gwbas1c 3y ago
    The driving tests in the US are a joke, IMO.
    - thfuran 3y ago
      And then it's really hard to lose them, even for severe infractions.
    - rascul 3y ago
      Some states just have parking tests that they call driving tests.
numpad0 3y ago
NHTSA/SAE are the ones that created and pushed that useless Level system in favor of car companies, and with Cruise now on the floor and every car companies reduced to stains on the wall, no party is able to certify an SDC other than maybe Waymo self declaring itself safe. It's funny it was afyer all just Waymo code dump, NVIDIA demo, and everyone else desperately trying and failing to make some departures from it(other than MobilEye?)

paxys 3y ago

Completely agree. Living and driving around SF over the last couple of years it's very clear that Waymo is the only one that meets the bare minimum standard of being allowed to operate on public roads, and they are also the one with the least number of cars on the road and most limited routes. Regardless of how many years and billions of dollars that have been poured into the space, it is not anywhere close to ready for prime time.

HankB99 3y ago

> more rigorous testing/scoring system before these systems are allowed on the open road It never occurred to me that the AIs driving these vehicles should be tested, but that makes absolute sense. I wonder what tests these systems must pass before allowed on the road. I remind that it's important that the vehicles do better than human drivers and sadly that's a pretty low bar. I hope we aren't evaluating this primarily by counting deaths, injuries and property damage and comparing between the two.

avar 3y ago
We already have driving tests, have them pass those, and if those tests aren't stringent enough then the tests need fixing, for humans and robots alike.
- thfuran 3y ago
  I'm not convinced that the tests should be the same. A human and a computer aren't the same thing, so why must they be assessed the same way?
  - Teever 3y ago
    Because it's not about the thing that's doing, it's about the thing that's being done.
    - thfuran 3y ago
      But it is about the thing that's doing. A test is designed with assumptions and knowledge about the thing under test. That two systems perform the same on a test doesn't necessarily mean that they will perform the same out of band, so unless the test is exactingly and comprehensively covering the totality of desired behavior/functionality, two fundamentally very different systems may best be tested with two different tests.
- gwbas1c 3y ago
  The driving tests in the US are a joke, IMO.
  - thfuran 3y ago
    And then it's really hard to lose them, even for severe infractions.
  - rascul 3y ago
    Some states just have parking tests that they call driving tests.

numpad0 3y ago

NHTSA/SAE are the ones that created and pushed that useless Level system in favor of car companies, and with Cruise now on the floor and every car companies reduced to stains on the wall, no party is able to certify an SDC other than maybe Waymo self declaring itself safe. It's funny it was afyer all just Waymo code dump, NVIDIA demo, and everyone else desperately trying and failing to make some departures from it(other than MobilEye?)