6 ms·
There are already today software failures in cars which created serious problems: like drive-by-wire cars who wouldn't stop accelerating. As of now the problem
by martinced 14y ago
There are already today software failures in cars which created serious problems: like drive-by-wire cars who wouldn't stop accelerating.
As of now the problem is mitigated by having someone behind the wheel. Even when the motor shutdowns and when you lose assistance, you can still turn the steering wheel, brake and/or use the handbrake. This has saved many lifes.
But now how often do OS / software have bugs? Security issues? I can't imagine for a second that these cars are going to be fully autonomous and not connected to a network. How can we possibly make that network safe?
Lately on HN the consensus seemed to be: "Every software has bugs, every software can be exploited if the attacker spends enough time".
So is the software in these cars going to be safe? Safe from ill-intentioned exploits, safe from bugs potentially threatening lives?
Now if there are less dead then what we typically have in a year, ok. You'll have to check the numbers.
But there are going to be deads. That is just a fact.
And the public reaction when there's going be a dead due to a "computer driving" is going to be terrible.
I mean: it's amazing to see all these people saying, on one side, "It's normal that there are hundreds of millions of zombies part of gigantic botnets, we'll never have 100% secure software" and, on the other side, these very same people saying: "Can't wait to have an autonomous car in 3 years / 15 years".
So what is it? Insecure software or safe cars?
- dantheman 14y agoYou're assuming that people driving cars is safe. The question is which is less dangerous - an autonomous car or a normal car.
- yummyfajitas 14y agoThe real question is why the machines discriminate against old people: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/03/how-real-are-the-defects-in-toyotas-cars/37448/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/03/how-real... According to the NTSB, unintended acceleration was not caused by electronic errors. It was caused by "pedal misapplication" and mechanical failures (gas gets stuck under the floor mat). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%962011_Toyota_vehicle_recalls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%962011_Toyota_vehicle_rec...
- untog 14y agoInsecure software or safe cars? Your implication being that there is such a thing as a safe car. I think that people are excited for self-driving cars on the basis that they will kill fewer people on average than human drivers do. It's a slightly depressing way to think about things, but it's realistic. However, the media hysteria that will surround the first self-driving car accident/killing will be critical.
- thedrbrian 14y agoI'm curious where or with who the buck stops. If my driverless car causes an accident who is to blame? It couldn't have been me as I gave it full control and was asleep in the back. Is it the developer of the software or the builder of the car? Maybe a sensor failed and thus the finger is pointed at me but I point it at the dealer who service the car. Given that the people who would most benefit from this tech are the same people who are least likely to give a shit about the upkeep of their car we are going to have a few years of interesting news headlines.
- micampe 14y agoHumans fail too. If the software is not perfect but still safer than a person, you still come out ahead.
- Ntrails 14y agoCan it pass the same driving test as every person passes? If so, why would it be considered less capable than a human who passes the same test? I mean, realistically that is the only barrier between a human being and driving. Jay walkers get hit by humans. Cars running red lights get hit by humans. Sometimes they don't even brake because they were looking in their mirrors or fiddling with the radio. The risk of your car being hacked is the one area that I find really scary. It can already happen to an extent - but this could be a lot lot worse.