6 ms·

As I understand it current self driving car technology fails whenever the situation becomes sufficiently complex (eg. icy/wet roads, some other unexpected traff

As I understand it current self driving car technology fails whenever the situation becomes sufficiently complex (eg. icy/wet roads, some other unexpected traffic situation) and require the driver to take control at this point. My inference from that was that the 'simple' problems have been solved, but to have technology that can safely drive an intoxicated person home would require solving another set of much harder problems. Ie. the ninety-ninety rule.

lutusp 13y ago
> My inference from that was that the 'simple' problems have been solved, but to have technology that can safely drive an intoxicated person home would require solving another set of much harder problems. But they already have cars that drive themselves, without human interference. Google (and other companies') engineers have been driving them all over the country on test runs. Obviously if the car will drive itself to a specified destination autonomously, the physical state of the occupant is no longer an issue. > Ie. the ninety-ninety rule. Yes, fair enough -- I'm sure there are still edge cases, but the OP said, with respect to this technology, "... we won't see that kind of thing even within the next few decades, if ever." The turning point will be when the technology's edge cases are less dangerous than a human driver's edge cases. That won't take very long.
- rimantas 13y ago
  > when the technology's edge cases are less dangerous than a human driver's edge > cases. That won't take very long. Just a couple of decades.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    That seems about right. For American drivers, maybe a bit too long. :)
  - matthewmacleod 13y ago
    A vanishingly small amount of time, really.
- MrScruff 13y ago
  But they already have cars that drive themselves, without human interference. Google (and other companies') engineers have been driving them all over the country on test runs. Obviously if the car will drive itself to a specified destination autonomously, the physical state of the occupant is no longer an issue. The physical state of the occupant is an issue if there are situations where the occupant might need to regain control of the vehicle. Unless the autonomous car can handle all potential situations the occupant will still need to be in a fit state to drive the vehicle.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > The physical state of the occupant is an issue if there are situations where the occupant might need to regain control of the vehicle. All I can say is that the goal of self-driving cars is to take the occupant out of the picture entirely. I think a lot of public safety officials will welcome this change. Eventually, there will be two classes of vehicle occupants -- those who are qualified to touch the controls, and those who aren't. For an earlier social model, look at elevators. At one time, to have an elevator in your building, you had to hire an elevator operator. Then there were elevators that the building's occupants could operate if they were careful and knew what to avoid. Now elevators are safely operated by anyone. Same idea.
prawn 13y ago
Humans fail regularly even when the situation is not especially complex! e.g., not paying attention and rear-ending someone at lights on a straight, dry road during the day.
- MrScruff 13y ago
  That's of course true. However if a human driver causes injury through error he might expect to be held liable. If an autonomous vehicle responds incorrectly to an unanticipated driving scenario and causes injury, the manufacturer will likely be subject to a lawsuit.
  - jarek 13y ago
    And if you thought the "sudden unexpected acceleration" hysteria recently was bad, just wait for the first time someone dies in or because of a robocar
aeturnum 13y ago
It seems likely to me that automated cars could do the following with incremental, predictable progress: 1) Drive with good road conditions on pavement in areas that have accurate maps. 2) Recognize when conditions change and the car has a lower chance of functioning correctly. 3) When 2 occurs, pull over and yield to the human, or turn around and go back to another location. This isn't the fantasy of "get wasted, get driven home, no matter what," but it seems good enough to ensure people are safe. Maybe you can get home, or maybe you sleep it off on the side of the road, or maybe your car drives you to a motel.

lutusp 13y ago

> My inference from that was that the 'simple' problems have been solved, but to have technology that can safely drive an intoxicated person home would require solving another set of much harder problems. But they already have cars that drive themselves, without human interference. Google (and other companies') engineers have been driving them all over the country on test runs. Obviously if the car will drive itself to a specified destination autonomously, the physical state of the occupant is no longer an issue. > Ie. the ninety-ninety rule. Yes, fair enough -- I'm sure there are still edge cases, but the OP said, with respect to this technology, "... we won't see that kind of thing even within the next few decades, if ever." The turning point will be when the technology's edge cases are less dangerous than a human driver's edge cases. That won't take very long.

rimantas 13y ago
> when the technology's edge cases are less dangerous than a human driver's edge > cases. That won't take very long. Just a couple of decades.
- lutusp 13y ago
  That seems about right. For American drivers, maybe a bit too long. :)
- matthewmacleod 13y ago
  A vanishingly small amount of time, really.
MrScruff 13y ago
But they already have cars that drive themselves, without human interference. Google (and other companies') engineers have been driving them all over the country on test runs. Obviously if the car will drive itself to a specified destination autonomously, the physical state of the occupant is no longer an issue. The physical state of the occupant is an issue if there are situations where the occupant might need to regain control of the vehicle. Unless the autonomous car can handle all potential situations the occupant will still need to be in a fit state to drive the vehicle.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > The physical state of the occupant is an issue if there are situations where the occupant might need to regain control of the vehicle. All I can say is that the goal of self-driving cars is to take the occupant out of the picture entirely. I think a lot of public safety officials will welcome this change. Eventually, there will be two classes of vehicle occupants -- those who are qualified to touch the controls, and those who aren't. For an earlier social model, look at elevators. At one time, to have an elevator in your building, you had to hire an elevator operator. Then there were elevators that the building's occupants could operate if they were careful and knew what to avoid. Now elevators are safely operated by anyone. Same idea.

prawn 13y ago

Humans fail regularly even when the situation is not especially complex! e.g., not paying attention and rear-ending someone at lights on a straight, dry road during the day.

MrScruff 13y ago
That's of course true. However if a human driver causes injury through error he might expect to be held liable. If an autonomous vehicle responds incorrectly to an unanticipated driving scenario and causes injury, the manufacturer will likely be subject to a lawsuit.
- jarek 13y ago
  And if you thought the "sudden unexpected acceleration" hysteria recently was bad, just wait for the first time someone dies in or because of a robocar

aeturnum 13y ago

It seems likely to me that automated cars could do the following with incremental, predictable progress: 1) Drive with good road conditions on pavement in areas that have accurate maps. 2) Recognize when conditions change and the car has a lower chance of functioning correctly. 3) When 2 occurs, pull over and yield to the human, or turn around and go back to another location. This isn't the fantasy of "get wasted, get driven home, no matter what," but it seems good enough to ensure people are safe. Maybe you can get home, or maybe you sleep it off on the side of the road, or maybe your car drives you to a motel.