4 ms·

This reminds me of a Kickstarter campaign I saw a few months ago. The campaign's goal was to build low-cost bouncing balls that cleared mine fields. You could r

This reminds me of a Kickstarter campaign I saw a few months ago. The campaign's goal was to build low-cost bouncing balls that cleared mine fields. You could roll the ball into a dangerous, abandoned area and it would cause dormant mines to explode. The problem with that campaign is that it instilled a false sense of confidence. The technology was "an in-between": certainly better than nothing, but not as effective or safe as traditional mine-clearing methods. Cruise is in a similar position. They have a chance to improve people's lives and prevent serious injuries. At the same time, they're toeing a delicate line between improving drivers' safety and causing them to become complacent.

kvogt 12y ago
There is a fatal virus in the US that claims 3,000 people every month. And it's a nasty one. It's the #1 cause of death for teenagers. That virus is called a car accident, and the fact we're complacent with that is what scares me. We understand the delicate balance you describe and it's our top priority to make sure our product actually does improve drivers' safety. That's why we're using independent third party testing by the same companies who test products for the major automakers, even though there is no law or regulation requiring us to do so.
- d23 12y ago
  > even though there is no law or regulation requiring us to do so. Are you honestly saying there's no laws around safety requirements in vehicles? Also, there's the fear of lawsuits.
  - kvogt 12y ago
    We do not make cars, and very few of the NHTSA regulations or FMVSS apply to this kind of product (at least for now). My point is that we recognize our own testing, regardless of its thoroughness, is not enough.
- adamgravitis 12y ago
  And in what way, exactly, is that a virus? Epidemic, at a stretch. (I'm not typically this pedantic... I just think viruses have particularly interesting information dynamics and it's really weird to me when applied as a metaphor outside of where that would make sense.)
  - mikeash 12y ago
    I think "disease" would be a decent description. "Virus" carries way too many implications about things like communicability and origination that clearly don't apply. I'd say it's more like cancer: lots of stuff influences it, and you can make yourself a lot safer, but it's ultimately fairly random and anybody can fall victim to it. You can't catch it from other people, you can't get vaccinated against it, surviving it doesn't give you any immunity for the next time, better surgical and other medical techniques are making it more survivable.... One big difference, of course, is the age factor.
    - dllthomas 12y ago
      "You can't catch it from other people," You might catch memes (drunk driving, reckless driving, street racing) that significantly increase the likelihood that you suffer from it. Still not quite the same thing, of course. "you can't get vaccinated against it" The opposite memes from the above would seem to serve a role not too far from inoculation. "surviving it doesn't give you any immunity for the next time" Except to the degree that it changes your behavior. All of that said, I agree. "Disease" is a much better term.
      - kvogt 12y ago
        Agreed. Was simply trying to demonstrate that we're far too comfortable with the consequences of unsafe driving. In any other circumstance we'd all be up in arms.
- hawkharris 12y ago
  I appreciate your comment and what you're trying to do. I guess I still can't picture how Cruise will achieve the balance between convenience and awareness. Let's say you're a teenager using Cruise to keep your car within the white lines on a 5-hour, highway road trip. The device is capable of steering the car this way on your behalf. In that situation, do you stare at the white lines for 5 hours without touching the steering wheel? Or do you text and talk to your friends? What compels you to be just as vigilant about steering and being aware of your surroundings?
  - altcognito 12y ago
    I agree, but the guy I drove next to reading a magazine this morning wasn't doing a terribly good job staying in the white lines this morning either.
    - scintill76 12y ago
      So you'd rather his car automatically keep him in between the lines, so that he feels even more safe and complacent about reading his magazine, and rear-ends you later when you end up in front of him and have to brake suddenly? I don't think I would. I think that's the point of the naysayers in this sub-thread. Doing X% of driving for bad drivers, might just make them even worse at the remaining (100-X)% of driving.
      - SoftwareMaven 12y ago
        But the sensors and actuators that are keeping him in his lane would surely fire the brakes far faster and harder than he would while reading his magazine. If all the tech does is keep you in your lane, it's certainly dangerous, but I seriously doubt that's what they are building.
        scintill76 12y ago
        Fair enough; I believe they do include this, or maybe it comes standard with the car. Still, should we be "enabling" bad driving? Are these systems actually capable of letting people safely read while they "drive"? Does a driver have a right to do that? Is it prudent? Who is morally/legally responsible when something goes wrong and damage is done? I guess as always, we'll figure it out as we go, but I'm not the only one who's a bit nervous.
- rmason 12y ago
  I think the biggest immediate payback from this technology is for trucks. A trucking company with a large fleet can more easily afford the cost if it cuts full consumption and reduces accidents.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  The way to improve drivers safety is by insisting on better schooling. Compared to the kind of testing I had to go through to get a driving license in NL the American (and the Canadian, for that matter) license test is way too simple. If you lower the bar to entry then you get more accidents, technology alone will not help with that unless you cut the driver out of the loop completely.
  - jonemo 12y ago
    I'd upvote this 10 times if I could. It's amazing how much Americans rely on driving while being abysmally bad at it. The amount of driving errors, almost accidents and accidents you can see during half an hour driving on 101 on the peninsula is more than what you'd see in an entire day on the Autobahn.
    - lsh123 12y ago
      It's more like 1.5x (per distance driven) when comparing Germany and United States: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-re... Interestingly, average cars age is 8.7 years in Germany and 11.4 years in USA (in 2013) which is 1.3x: http://europe.autonews.com/article/20130703/ANE/307029987/germanys-average-car-age-rises-to-record-8.7-years-old-on-europe http://europe.autonews.com/article/20130703/ANE/307029987/ge... http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/average-age-of-cars-in-us-jumps-to-record-high-of-114-years.html http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/average-age-of-cars-in-us-ju...
      - ericd 12y ago
        Given what I've seen here vs. in European countries with good driving test standards, I'm surprised it's not much higher. Maybe the distances in the US are larger? Or perhaps our roads are wider and so have more wiggle room, which compensates for the stunningly bad driver behavior I see every time I drive.
        tomp 12y ago
- droopyEyelids 12y ago
  So are you saying we should suspend our skepticism, and think of the children? I'm kidding but also serious. This seems like it'd be incredibly difficult to test, and also like that testing would make an incredibly interesting series of articles/blog posts.
- tim333 12y ago
  Well done for having a go at this. Given the global rate of car deaths at over 1m/yr you can definitely make an argument for developing cheap, slightly hackish systems now in rather than just the Google approach of developing very good but unavailable $100k systems. If this kind of approach can bring development forward a year or two that's a lot of lives saved.
- harry 12y ago
  Kyle, toootally dig what you're up to with this. Completely badass. If anyone can handle it, it's you. Nothing but the best wishes! -harry
- drewblay 12y ago
  >There is a fatal virus in the US that claims 3,000 people every month. And it's a nasty one. It's the #1 cause of death for teenagers. That virus is called a car accident, and the fact we're complacent with that is what scares me. I don't think you understand the word "virus". So you want me to pay you $10,000 to loose my freedom to drive my own car? Not a chance in hell. Look, I am sorry that 3,000 people die everyone month, but I would rather live in a world where 3,000 die in car accidents and people have the freedom to drive then live in world where computers drive everyone around.
GuiA 12y ago
The project I believe `hawkharris is talking about: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/massoudhassani/mine-kafon/ https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/massoudhassani/mine-kaf...
d23 12y ago
My first thought is that it potentially could have a warning system stating whether the system guaged its ability to drive as "safe", "be careful", or "hey I can't do this, you should drive." A noise or color system could be used to alert the driver. Perhaps on a freeway with little traffic that the Cruise has seen plenty of times, it could be fully safe. But on some backroad that it hasn't seen before, or during bad weather conditions, it would go into fully manual mode.
- droopyEyelids 12y ago
  Spitballing here, but let's imagine a common impaired driving situation- being very sleepy and needing to get somewhere on a time-schedule. I don't know if you've ever been in that situation, but it's possible to fall all the way asleep while driving. It's such a common thing that they carve rumble strips into the sides of highways. Being so sleepy is a tricky thing. You can fall asleep even with the radio going full blast. I can't imagine any alarm system that would stop someone being lulled to sleep by the engine and movement of a car doing 90% of the driving.

kvogt 12y ago

There is a fatal virus in the US that claims 3,000 people every month. And it's a nasty one. It's the #1 cause of death for teenagers. That virus is called a car accident, and the fact we're complacent with that is what scares me. We understand the delicate balance you describe and it's our top priority to make sure our product actually does improve drivers' safety. That's why we're using independent third party testing by the same companies who test products for the major automakers, even though there is no law or regulation requiring us to do so.

d23 12y ago
> even though there is no law or regulation requiring us to do so. Are you honestly saying there's no laws around safety requirements in vehicles? Also, there's the fear of lawsuits.
- kvogt 12y ago
  We do not make cars, and very few of the NHTSA regulations or FMVSS apply to this kind of product (at least for now). My point is that we recognize our own testing, regardless of its thoroughness, is not enough.
adamgravitis 12y ago
And in what way, exactly, is that a virus? Epidemic, at a stretch. (I'm not typically this pedantic... I just think viruses have particularly interesting information dynamics and it's really weird to me when applied as a metaphor outside of where that would make sense.)
- mikeash 12y ago
  I think "disease" would be a decent description. "Virus" carries way too many implications about things like communicability and origination that clearly don't apply. I'd say it's more like cancer: lots of stuff influences it, and you can make yourself a lot safer, but it's ultimately fairly random and anybody can fall victim to it. You can't catch it from other people, you can't get vaccinated against it, surviving it doesn't give you any immunity for the next time, better surgical and other medical techniques are making it more survivable.... One big difference, of course, is the age factor.
  - dllthomas 12y ago
    "You can't catch it from other people," You might catch memes (drunk driving, reckless driving, street racing) that significantly increase the likelihood that you suffer from it. Still not quite the same thing, of course. "you can't get vaccinated against it" The opposite memes from the above would seem to serve a role not too far from inoculation. "surviving it doesn't give you any immunity for the next time" Except to the degree that it changes your behavior. All of that said, I agree. "Disease" is a much better term.
    - kvogt 12y ago
      Agreed. Was simply trying to demonstrate that we're far too comfortable with the consequences of unsafe driving. In any other circumstance we'd all be up in arms.
hawkharris 12y ago
I appreciate your comment and what you're trying to do. I guess I still can't picture how Cruise will achieve the balance between convenience and awareness. Let's say you're a teenager using Cruise to keep your car within the white lines on a 5-hour, highway road trip. The device is capable of steering the car this way on your behalf. In that situation, do you stare at the white lines for 5 hours without touching the steering wheel? Or do you text and talk to your friends? What compels you to be just as vigilant about steering and being aware of your surroundings?
- altcognito 12y ago
  I agree, but the guy I drove next to reading a magazine this morning wasn't doing a terribly good job staying in the white lines this morning either.
  - scintill76 12y ago
    So you'd rather his car automatically keep him in between the lines, so that he feels even more safe and complacent about reading his magazine, and rear-ends you later when you end up in front of him and have to brake suddenly? I don't think I would. I think that's the point of the naysayers in this sub-thread. Doing X% of driving for bad drivers, might just make them even worse at the remaining (100-X)% of driving.
    - SoftwareMaven 12y ago
      But the sensors and actuators that are keeping him in his lane would surely fire the brakes far faster and harder than he would while reading his magazine. If all the tech does is keep you in your lane, it's certainly dangerous, but I seriously doubt that's what they are building.
      - scintill76 12y ago
        Fair enough; I believe they do include this, or maybe it comes standard with the car. Still, should we be "enabling" bad driving? Are these systems actually capable of letting people safely read while they "drive"? Does a driver have a right to do that? Is it prudent? Who is morally/legally responsible when something goes wrong and damage is done? I guess as always, we'll figure it out as we go, but I'm not the only one who's a bit nervous.
rmason 12y ago
I think the biggest immediate payback from this technology is for trucks. A trucking company with a large fleet can more easily afford the cost if it cuts full consumption and reduces accidents.
jacquesm 12y ago
The way to improve drivers safety is by insisting on better schooling. Compared to the kind of testing I had to go through to get a driving license in NL the American (and the Canadian, for that matter) license test is way too simple. If you lower the bar to entry then you get more accidents, technology alone will not help with that unless you cut the driver out of the loop completely.
- jonemo 12y ago
  I'd upvote this 10 times if I could. It's amazing how much Americans rely on driving while being abysmally bad at it. The amount of driving errors, almost accidents and accidents you can see during half an hour driving on 101 on the peninsula is more than what you'd see in an entire day on the Autobahn.
  - lsh123 12y ago
    It's more like 1.5x (per distance driven) when comparing Germany and United States: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-re... Interestingly, average cars age is 8.7 years in Germany and 11.4 years in USA (in 2013) which is 1.3x: http://europe.autonews.com/article/20130703/ANE/307029987/germanys-average-car-age-rises-to-record-8.7-years-old-on-europe http://europe.autonews.com/article/20130703/ANE/307029987/ge... http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/average-age-of-cars-in-us-jumps-to-record-high-of-114-years.html http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/average-age-of-cars-in-us-ju...
    - ericd 12y ago
      Given what I've seen here vs. in European countries with good driving test standards, I'm surprised it's not much higher. Maybe the distances in the US are larger? Or perhaps our roads are wider and so have more wiggle room, which compensates for the stunningly bad driver behavior I see every time I drive.
      - tomp 12y ago
droopyEyelids 12y ago
So are you saying we should suspend our skepticism, and think of the children? I'm kidding but also serious. This seems like it'd be incredibly difficult to test, and also like that testing would make an incredibly interesting series of articles/blog posts.
tim333 12y ago
Well done for having a go at this. Given the global rate of car deaths at over 1m/yr you can definitely make an argument for developing cheap, slightly hackish systems now in rather than just the Google approach of developing very good but unavailable $100k systems. If this kind of approach can bring development forward a year or two that's a lot of lives saved.
harry 12y ago
Kyle, toootally dig what you're up to with this. Completely badass. If anyone can handle it, it's you. Nothing but the best wishes! -harry
drewblay 12y ago
>There is a fatal virus in the US that claims 3,000 people every month. And it's a nasty one. It's the #1 cause of death for teenagers. That virus is called a car accident, and the fact we're complacent with that is what scares me. I don't think you understand the word "virus". So you want me to pay you $10,000 to loose my freedom to drive my own car? Not a chance in hell. Look, I am sorry that 3,000 people die everyone month, but I would rather live in a world where 3,000 die in car accidents and people have the freedom to drive then live in world where computers drive everyone around.

GuiA 12y ago

The project I believe `hawkharris is talking about: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/massoudhassani/mine-kafon/ https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/massoudhassani/mine-kaf...

d23 12y ago

My first thought is that it potentially could have a warning system stating whether the system guaged its ability to drive as "safe", "be careful", or "hey I can't do this, you should drive." A noise or color system could be used to alert the driver. Perhaps on a freeway with little traffic that the Cruise has seen plenty of times, it could be fully safe. But on some backroad that it hasn't seen before, or during bad weather conditions, it would go into fully manual mode.

droopyEyelids 12y ago
Spitballing here, but let's imagine a common impaired driving situation- being very sleepy and needing to get somewhere on a time-schedule. I don't know if you've ever been in that situation, but it's possible to fall all the way asleep while driving. It's such a common thing that they carve rumble strips into the sides of highways. Being so sleepy is a tricky thing. You can fall asleep even with the radio going full blast. I can't imagine any alarm system that would stop someone being lulled to sleep by the engine and movement of a car doing 90% of the driving.