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

U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 116 posts

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#71

Post by russdill »

fuhrysteve wrote: post #11
0xcde4c3db wrote: post #4

> Advocates hope self-driving cars can help reduce U.S. road deaths, which rose 7.7 percent in 2015, the highest annual jump since 1966. This was a news story in itself [1]. It was attributed to increased driving, encouraged by economic factors such as higher employment and lower gas prices. [1] http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/18/467230965/...

> attributed to increased driving, encouraged by economic factors such as higher employment and lower gas prices Interesting - I always assumed that the increase in road deaths was at least largely due to increased cellphone usage, resulting in distracted drivers.

Perhaps they've been offset by increased safety standards.

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#72

Post by pg314 »

ghaff wrote: post #69
mobilefriendly wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with government approval, there will be fatal accidents. This approach is better because it DIRECTLY holds automakers liable-- they can't claim immunity because some bureaucrat approved the vehicle. And it keeps politics and technical ignorance out of the development cycle. Also, 3,000 people die every month on U.S. roads, your medicine analogy is wrong because there is much harm from the current system.

One issue is this. Assume self-driving cars exist at some point. Assume they reduce fatalities by 90 percent. Ignore injuries. Now "only" 3,000 people are being killed by autonomous vehicles because "Hey, software isn't perfect and stuff happens." How many consumer products today kill that many people a year and the public is basically OK with it? I'm not saying that the companies shouldn't make reasonable payments a…

There are plenty of medical procedures that save lots of lives but occasionally kill people. The public is ok with that because it is way better than the alternative.

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#73

Post by ghaff »

pg314 wrote: post #72
ghaff wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One issue is this. Assume self-driving cars exist at some point. Assume they reduce fatalities by 90 percent. Ignore injuries. Now "only" 3,000 people are being killed by autonomous vehicles because "Hey, software isn't perfect and stuff happens." How many consumer products today kill that many people a year and the public is basically OK with it? I'm not saying that the companies shouldn't make reasonable payments a…

There are plenty of medical procedures that save lots of lives but occasionally kill people. The public is ok with that because it is way better than the alternative.

Medicine generally is the closest analog. On the other hand when someone dies because of a rare drug side effect, lawsuits are common. There's a reason why the drug companies are protected from liability in the case of common vaccines [and that medical malpractice insurance is so expensive].

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#74

Post by ghshephard »

dayaz36 wrote: post #42
azernik wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that this is from a base of zero, and the cap is set to rise by 4x to 100k by 2020 (which is when Waymo plans to start introducing driverless cars), I do not think that this is at all a slow pace.

GM sells sells 10M cars per year so 100k would be 1% of that. Also who's Waymo? Tesla is planning to demonstrate a CA to NY trip with zero human intervention in just a few months and Elon has said they're shooting for 2019 for L5 FSD for their entire fleet made past October 2016 (they've already put in the hardware necessary for FSD so when the software is ready a simple OTA software update is all that's necessary fo…

If, by L5 you mean, I can get in my car, at a random, drivable over legal roads location, and instruct the vehicle to take me to another (within reasonable distance) location that is drivable over legal roads - I.E. Google Maps has a route. Basically, no steering wheel required.

Benedict Evans, at A16Z, says that some of the smartest people in the automated driving field say that L5 autonomy is 15-20 years out at the earliest.

Let's just say that Elon Musk has been known to be a little "enthusiastic" when setting goals and objectives for his team.

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#75

Post by ghshephard »

danblick wrote: post #64
dayaz36 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you think simulation environment is more valuable than real world data. Waymo doesn't even have as much data in simulated environment as Tesla does in real world data, which is hilarious.

In a simulation environment you know ground truth. (Where objects actually were vs. what you saw.) You can play the same scenario from slightly different angles. Or different conditions (rain, snow, low light, bright light). You can look at counterfactuals (what would I have seen if I had done X). You can test the behavior of your system without actually setting a computer loose in the real world. From "real world" r…

Agreed with everything you are saying -but my understanding is that the Waymo simulation system doesn't simulate Input, it simulates the objects. The whole idea being that responding to objects is a separate problem from perceiving the in the first place.

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#77

Post by damnfine »

ghaff wrote: post #73
pg314 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of medical procedures that save lots of lives but occasionally kill people. The public is ok with that because it is way better than the alternative.

Medicine generally is the closest analog. On the other hand when someone dies because of a rare drug side effect, lawsuits are common. There's a reason why the drug companies are protected from liability in the case of common vaccines [and that medical malpractice insurance is so expensive].

Except in this case, someone else's bad medicine can kill you.

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#78

Post by 1337biz »

One of the very few things that I see as a massive benefit of the current Trump Whitehouse:

Now would be the time for moonshot projects!

I bet Trump would be willing to free a massive budgets if under his term there were a realistic chance on something like the moonlanding. Or something that would ensure him a positive entry in the history books. I truly hople Thiel or Musk use this rare opportunity.

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#79

Post by Retric »

1337biz wrote: post #78

One of the very few things that I see as a massive benefit of the current Trump Whitehouse: Now would be the time for moonshot projects! I bet Trump would be willing to free a massive budgets if under his term there were a realistic chance on something like the moonlanding. Or something that would ensure him a positive entry in the history books. I truly hople Thiel or Musk use this rare opportunity.

Most presidents would, but they don't create the budget.

Re: U.S. House approves proposal to speed the deployment of self-driving cars

#80

Post by steventhedev »

danblick wrote: post #33
0xcde4c3db wrote: post #4

> Advocates hope self-driving cars can help reduce U.S. road deaths, which rose 7.7 percent in 2015, the highest annual jump since 1966. This was a news story in itself [1]. It was attributed to increased driving, encouraged by economic factors such as higher employment and lower gas prices. [1] http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/18/467230965/...

I wonder what fraction involved smartphones? https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/16/business/tech-distract...

Rather than speculate on anecdotes, perhaps we can focus on actual data[0]. 2014-2015 only saw a +280 change in fatalities caused by distractions (read: texting).

Florida and Georgia combined saw a +190 drunk driving fatalities in the same period.

EDIT: found a more specific report about electronic device usage: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...

[0]: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...

Post reply on HN