Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 341 posts

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#161

Post by beachstartup »

coldtea wrote: post #150
MR4D wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine some drunk guy hops into his car in bad weather. He taps the auto-cruise button and then passes out. Snow, rain, construction, - something - hinders the ride somewhere along the way home. Car cannot process the issue correctly, and slows to a stop, alerting the driver. Driver, being sound asleep, cannot hear the annoying alert tone. Alert continues, and possibly after some time, alerts authorities of it's dis…

> I'll bet that in the near future (next decade or so), there will be rising incidents of traffic being blocked due to a stopped automated car who's driver is not responsive, but the computer couldn't handle some construction or weather, and went into fail-safe mode, simply slowing down and stopping (but not pulling over due to lack of space). Obviously "do not stop in the middle on the road" will be high on the prio…

yeah, just tell the autonomous 4000 pound missile that stopping is a low priority.

i fear much of the enthusiasm behind self-driving cars is from people who understand neither driving, nor computer software, very well.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#162

Post by ygjb-dupe »

schintan wrote: post #85
bluGill wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just remember that self driving cars do not have to be perfect, they just need to be better than humans. The use is at just over 1 death per million miles. If self driving cars can reach .5 they are better already. If the cars can detect the times they are bad and pull over (screw your appointment) that might be enough.

When I drive, at least I am in control. I don't give any thoughts to accident statistics. A self driving car may become safer statistically, but I don't see myself in a self driving car that is safer on an average but still has a non-zero chance of getting me in an accident.

No, you are not. You have an illusion of control over your vehicle, and while you may have a measure of operability, the actual control of your vehicle is depending on the correct functioning of the software and hardware that manages the various controls in your car (gas pedal, steering wheel, brakes, etc), and the efficacy of your operation of the vehicle is entirely dependent on the driving conditions, including other drivers, weather, wildlife, etc.

In fairness, your operation of the vehicle has a substantial impact on the outcome of operating the vehicle, the the decision loop that your brain implements while driving is largely incapable of effectively processing and executing on the volume of information and variables that are in play in the circumstances that lead to high speed collisions.

Anecdotally you might feel in control, but it is probably worth noting that most people, drunk or sober, tired on fully awake, fully alert or texting, felt like they were in control when they were suddenly the cause of, or involved in a collision.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#163

Post by stale2002 »

random_upvoter wrote: post #66
aetherson wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you get into a self-driving car that you knew had fewer fatalities per mile than the overall human average, but more fatalities per mile than the average of non-drunk, non-sleepy human drivers below the age of 70 and above the age of 20 with more than 5 years of driving experience? Serious question.

When a piece of software crashes out of its model space, it becomes infinitely stupid. A drunk driver, while impaired, retains a level of understanding of the situation but a program has nothing to fall back on. I suspect that accidents with automated driving, while rare, will tend to be more severe. Think train wrecks.

Not really. If something goes wrong, 99.9% of the time, the solution is to slam on the brakes, and maybe swerve a little to avoid an immediate obstacle. If a self driving car only does this, it will be a way better driver than a human.

Talking about weird edge cases misses the point. Edge case = slam on the brakes.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#164

Post by btrask »

> Four-way lights suck and if the cars can talk to each other and are fully autonomous why can’t we get rid of lights. This may sound very chaotic at first but hey, aren’t internet packets moving the same way?

"Sorry, your car has been dropped due to congestion. Please retransmit."

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#165

Post by agumonkey »

Svip wrote: post #153
agumonkey wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car "could" go pick up kids, groceries at different times.

I am not going to leave the kids at home, hoping they get into the car and off to the daycare centre, so I am assuming you mean before I get to work. So that means I have to wait for the car to get back before I get to work? Wouldn't that just cost me additional fuel? Seems like a bit of a waste to have my car go out twice (or four times if we count both getting to work and home) every weekday. Isn't this a more like…

Buses are lacking privacy/familiar feel of your own van (considering you want to use one car for a larger amount of people). And it's harder to plan a route the more people in the vehicle.

Now you have a point about kids safety. The car could still pick up and move things while you're busy, this means less time on the road when you are aka rush hours.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#166

Post by wolfram74 »

beachstartup wrote: post #161
coldtea wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'll bet that in the near future (next decade or so), there will be rising incidents of traffic being blocked due to a stopped automated car who's driver is not responsive, but the computer couldn't handle some construction or weather, and went into fail-safe mode, simply slowing down and stopping (but not pulling over due to lack of space). Obviously "do not stop in the middle on the road" will be high on the prio…

yeah, just tell the autonomous 4000 pound missile that stopping is a low priority. i fear much of the enthusiasm behind self-driving cars is from people who understand neither driving, nor computer software, very well.

That feels like you're intentionally misinterpreting the suggestion. The implied solution is that a car would preferentially stop off to the side of the road, rather than the middle.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#167

Post by Balgair »

"One argument is that commute times will take longer because we will become indifferent to how long the commute will take. As we approach the state where all cars are fully autonomous, there are no traffic lights and there are no accidents, we should be able to do anything we want during the commute. Heck, we can even sleep during the commute like we do on trains or plains. Commute will definitely transform from something painful to a much nicer activity. But also this will free up so much space (parking spots, auto repair shops) that people will live much closer to the work and won’t have to commute as much as today."

Ahahahah!

At least in SF, those parking lots will not be transformed into apartments. If they are, then the rents will be just as insane.

Also, does the author think that a self-driving car will not need repairs just as much as a regular car? If you add more stuff to a design, generally, you then have more things that can break and need repair. Yes, they may be gas-electric engines or just full batteries, but the sensors and whatnot will have to be repaired too. I think it's safe to say that the part-count on a self-driving car will be higher than the part counts on cars today. In addition to that, since the commute will not matter as much since you are asleep for most of it (the author thinks (also, why not just make you car a Winnebago and forgo the costs of rent?)) then you will be more comfortable living further away from your job. That means your car will spend more time and distance on the road humming along which then leads to more wear and tear, and therefore an increased need for repair (regardless of gas or battery power). If fact, you will need more square feet for auto-repair shops as the cars will wear out more quickly, but maybe not near population centers, as the car can go drive itself to a shop while you are at lunch.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#168

Post by FrancoDiaz »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #158
FrancoDiaz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And banning self-driving also is a convenient way for totalitarians to control the movement of the population. Of course we never hear about that around here.

And aliens could come from space and take over our planet. What's your point?

You know my point, you just don't like it. It's far from a stretch of the imagination to see a future where the government essentially has a kill-switch for most roads.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#169

Post by mnglkhn2 »

MR4D wrote: post #99
CPLX wrote: post #19

I find it odd the way people talk about moving through the levels sequentially without really acknowledging there's a massive phase change that happens somewhere between level two and four, where a self-driving car could easily be way more dangerous than the average human driver. That comes as soon as you have a situation where the automation has to be able to handle all foreseeable scenarios without failing because…

Imagine some drunk guy hops into his car in bad weather. He taps the auto-cruise button and then passes out. Snow, rain, construction, - something - hinders the ride somewhere along the way home. Car cannot process the issue correctly, and slows to a stop, alerting the driver. Driver, being sound asleep, cannot hear the annoying alert tone. Alert continues, and possibly after some time, alerts authorities of it's dis…

Today, more and more, cars are slowed down and delayed in traffic due to their owner's inattention to traffic and to focus on their phones. It is as these drivers are passed out drunk and relying on all other drivers to take care of traffic.

Re: Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars

#170

Post by [deleted] »

wolfram74 wrote: post #166
beachstartup wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, just tell the autonomous 4000 pound missile that stopping is a low priority. i fear much of the enthusiasm behind self-driving cars is from people who understand neither driving, nor computer software, very well.

That feels like you're intentionally misinterpreting the suggestion. The implied solution is that a car would preferentially stop off to the side of the road, rather than the middle.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN