4 ms·

As optimistic as I am about self-driving it seems like the “9s” model of reliability isn’t the right model here because one “outage” could be someone being kill

by yinser 3y ago

As optimistic as I am about self-driving it seems like the “9s” model of reliability isn’t the right model here because one “outage” could be someone being killed. The aftershock of the Cruise car dragging someone shows how far one accident can sully a company. The other issue I see is that I believe Waymo doesn’t live map the terrain in SF and Arizona right? They are using intricately created maps and so my question is what’s the leap for Waymo to operate with this success in say Pittsburgh?

agloe_dreams 3y ago
As much as I hate Elon, I do think that a proven 'better than a human by [X]times.' is a fair metric...as long as it is independently verified in ALL situations AND the company takes responsibility for the outcome.
- x86x87 3y ago
  Good luck with getting ALL situations. My theory is that as we face climate change more and more and as the economy goes out of whack owning a car will be a privilege for the rich and super rich. Sort of like it's already the case in parts of Europe. At that point this self-driving crap is going to look ridiculous. Even without it it's ridiculous testing this technology on public roads and gambling with everyone's life.
  - agloe_dreams 3y ago
    I think in urban areas that is exceptionally true. Here in the US there are places you can drive for 200 miles and not see a single human.
    - x86x87 3y ago
      Highway self-driving is mostly a solve problem (except maybe Tesla which will occasionally fuck it up). Urban areas are where the problems are at nowadays.
ceejayoz 3y ago
> The aftershock of the Cruise car dragging someone shows how far one accident can sully a company. Cruise's problem was hiding the footage from the regulators. As the saying goes, “It's not the crime, it's the cover-up.” https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/gms-cruise-robotaxi-service-faces-potential-fine-in-alleged-cover-up-of-san-francisco-accident/ https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/gms-cruise-robotax... > In a Dec. 1 filing recounting how Cruise handled disclosures about the accident, the Public Utilities Commission asserted the company tried to conceal how its robotaxi reacted to the accident for more than two weeks. Cruise didn't provide the video footage until Oct. 19, according to the regulatory filing. The cover-up spanned 15 days, according to the PUC, exposing Cruise and GM to potential fines of $100,000 per day, or $1.5 million.
wernercd 3y ago
The problem I have with that argument is what's the comparison to, say, drunk driving or impaired driving? While a car "dragging" someone can be traumatic and horrible in it's own right... objectively, if we could get rid of thousands of deaths a year in exchange for fewer "mishaps"? In 2021 2,116 people age 15-20 died in car crashes. 13,384 people for DUI related deaths in 2021. 42,939 car related deaths. If we could exchange 42k deaths for 1,000? wouldn't that be worth the tradeoff? Basically the trolly problem where you have to choose between letting a train go forward and kill 5 people or hitting a button to change tracks and kill 1. If we can get into the "9's" in accuracy and trust bypassing humans... why wouldn't we?
- flextheruler 3y ago
  You’re going to compare self-driving cars to drunk drivers so you can grade them on a curve? If you’re drunk you’re going to have pay for a ride either by a person or possible by program or you can break the law. I don’t see anyone who was going to drive drunk not do it because they could pay for a robot taxi over a real taxi. Here’s my comparison. If your self-driving car kills or maims someone in a situation where a normal sober person driving wouldn’t have it shouldn’t be on the road.
  - janosett 3y ago
    > If your self-driving car kills or maims someone in a situation where a normal sober person driving wouldn’t have What if it does this while also _not_ killing/harming in many other situations where a human would have?
  - wernercd 3y ago
    Drunk driving was one of many examples and one of many reasons people die driving. Did you not notice I also mentioned teen drivers (inexperienced drivers). And the full numbers of people killed by drivers - NOT just drunk drivers? "if your thing makes a mistake it shouldn't be on the road" yet the roads are full of people that make mistakes. (Hint: thousands of them die every year learning. See above about kids dying each yar). So you'll focus on one of many reasons to sidestep the question (bias of some sort?) so I'll say it again: At some point computers will be smart enough, fast enough and safe enough to do a better job at driving than people. Mistakes will be made but - like drunk drivers - humans make mistakes too. So if we can move to a safer way... why wouldn't we? Why are you willing to sacrifice thousands of kids lives if we can eventually progress to a better and safer option?
jseliger 3y ago
could be someone being killed Have you been paying attention to the status quo at all? https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state... If not, you might want to. https://jakeseliger.com/2019/12/16/maybe-cars-are-just-really-bad-but-theyre-normal-so-we-dont-pay-attention-to-how-bad/ https://jakeseliger.com/2019/12/16/maybe-cars-are-just-reall... I live in Arizona and have taken Waymo a bunch. It's great! https://twitter.com/seligerj/status/1707259311809073313/video/1 https://twitter.com/seligerj/status/1707259311809073313/vide...
- InCityDreams 3y ago
  Would you take the same in New York?
- itsoktocry 3y ago
  >Have you been paying attention to the status quo at all? Humans make mistakes and car accidents happen. We don't and won't accept the same from machines. Why is that so hard to understand?

by yinser 3y ago

agloe_dreams 3y ago

As much as I hate Elon, I do think that a proven 'better than a human by [X]times.' is a fair metric...as long as it is independently verified in ALL situations AND the company takes responsibility for the outcome.

x86x87 3y ago
Good luck with getting ALL situations. My theory is that as we face climate change more and more and as the economy goes out of whack owning a car will be a privilege for the rich and super rich. Sort of like it's already the case in parts of Europe. At that point this self-driving crap is going to look ridiculous. Even without it it's ridiculous testing this technology on public roads and gambling with everyone's life.
- agloe_dreams 3y ago
  I think in urban areas that is exceptionally true. Here in the US there are places you can drive for 200 miles and not see a single human.
  - x86x87 3y ago
    Highway self-driving is mostly a solve problem (except maybe Tesla which will occasionally fuck it up). Urban areas are where the problems are at nowadays.

ceejayoz 3y ago

> The aftershock of the Cruise car dragging someone shows how far one accident can sully a company. Cruise's problem was hiding the footage from the regulators. As the saying goes, “It's not the crime, it's the cover-up.” https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/gms-cruise-robotaxi-service-faces-potential-fine-in-alleged-cover-up-of-san-francisco-accident/ https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/gms-cruise-robotax... > In a Dec. 1 filing recounting how Cruise handled disclosures about the accident, the Public Utilities Commission asserted the company tried to conceal how its robotaxi reacted to the accident for more than two weeks. Cruise didn't provide the video footage until Oct. 19, according to the regulatory filing. The cover-up spanned 15 days, according to the PUC, exposing Cruise and GM to potential fines of $100,000 per day, or $1.5 million.

wernercd 3y ago

The problem I have with that argument is what's the comparison to, say, drunk driving or impaired driving? While a car "dragging" someone can be traumatic and horrible in it's own right... objectively, if we could get rid of thousands of deaths a year in exchange for fewer "mishaps"? In 2021 2,116 people age 15-20 died in car crashes. 13,384 people for DUI related deaths in 2021. 42,939 car related deaths. If we could exchange 42k deaths for 1,000? wouldn't that be worth the tradeoff? Basically the trolly problem where you have to choose between letting a train go forward and kill 5 people or hitting a button to change tracks and kill 1. If we can get into the "9's" in accuracy and trust bypassing humans... why wouldn't we?

flextheruler 3y ago
You’re going to compare self-driving cars to drunk drivers so you can grade them on a curve? If you’re drunk you’re going to have pay for a ride either by a person or possible by program or you can break the law. I don’t see anyone who was going to drive drunk not do it because they could pay for a robot taxi over a real taxi. Here’s my comparison. If your self-driving car kills or maims someone in a situation where a normal sober person driving wouldn’t have it shouldn’t be on the road.
- janosett 3y ago
  > If your self-driving car kills or maims someone in a situation where a normal sober person driving wouldn’t have What if it does this while also _not_ killing/harming in many other situations where a human would have?
- wernercd 3y ago
  Drunk driving was one of many examples and one of many reasons people die driving. Did you not notice I also mentioned teen drivers (inexperienced drivers). And the full numbers of people killed by drivers - NOT just drunk drivers? "if your thing makes a mistake it shouldn't be on the road" yet the roads are full of people that make mistakes. (Hint: thousands of them die every year learning. See above about kids dying each yar). So you'll focus on one of many reasons to sidestep the question (bias of some sort?) so I'll say it again: At some point computers will be smart enough, fast enough and safe enough to do a better job at driving than people. Mistakes will be made but - like drunk drivers - humans make mistakes too. So if we can move to a safer way... why wouldn't we? Why are you willing to sacrifice thousands of kids lives if we can eventually progress to a better and safer option?

jseliger 3y ago

could be someone being killed Have you been paying attention to the status quo at all? https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state... If not, you might want to. https://jakeseliger.com/2019/12/16/maybe-cars-are-just-really-bad-but-theyre-normal-so-we-dont-pay-attention-to-how-bad/ https://jakeseliger.com/2019/12/16/maybe-cars-are-just-reall... I live in Arizona and have taken Waymo a bunch. It's great! https://twitter.com/seligerj/status/1707259311809073313/video/1 https://twitter.com/seligerj/status/1707259311809073313/vide...

InCityDreams 3y ago
Would you take the same in New York?
itsoktocry 3y ago
>Have you been paying attention to the status quo at all? Humans make mistakes and car accidents happen. We don't and won't accept the same from machines. Why is that so hard to understand?