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

Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 181 posts

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#51

Post by pjc50 »

jessriedel wrote: post #44
menacingly wrote: post #13

There was a time when I thought of regulations as progress killers, but I find myself shifting on that and getting nervous every time I hear about self-driving tech. It's great stuff, but I really do not want my family to be the brave eggs we had to crack to get to the omelet of a driverless future. I now _like_ that someone somewhere has a book listing chemicals that aren't allowed to be shipped on an airplane, and…

How so you feel about the 30k people who die each year the tech is delayed? Or do you really think the litigation system (where currently car manufactures almost are never liable) is properly tuned to minimize the time until that is achieved?

This all hinges on the unknowable of how safe the competing system will be. And how long it will take to roll out - a decade at absolute best before 50% of journeys are done with no human attention.

Launching unsafe self-driving cars will delay the rollout as soon as the first big accident happens.

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#52

Post by nsgi »

ghaff wrote: post #37
criddell wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Resisting this is simple FUD? There's some psychology at work as well. Say self-driving cars cut the road accident and fatality rate in half but in the remaining incidents, half of those are driver error but the rest are all due to hardware and software problems. I think a lot of people would have a problem if half of all fatalities are due to system glitches even if the net result is fewer deaths and I don't think…

It will also be somewhat new ground. As I've noted before, there are relatively few examples of consumer-facing technologies/products where properly maintained and used (or sometimes even misused) products kill and maim--and people are just fine with that because "stuff happens" and the cost/benefit is reasonable. Drug interactions are one of the relatively few areas today and even those often lead to lawsuits. (And…

Cigarettes are probably the best example, they look a lot more people than cars.

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#53

Post by azernik »

menacingly wrote: post #13

There was a time when I thought of regulations as progress killers, but I find myself shifting on that and getting nervous every time I hear about self-driving tech. It's great stuff, but I really do not want my family to be the brave eggs we had to crack to get to the omelet of a driverless future. I now _like_ that someone somewhere has a book listing chemicals that aren't allowed to be shipped on an airplane, and…

I'm still uncomfortable with lawsuits, but mostly because they're really inefficient ways to enforce regulation. In most places, legislatures add an area to the remit of a regulator; in the US they create private causes of action.

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#54

Post by smokeyj »

menacingly wrote: post #13

There was a time when I thought of regulations as progress killers, but I find myself shifting on that and getting nervous every time I hear about self-driving tech. It's great stuff, but I really do not want my family to be the brave eggs we had to crack to get to the omelet of a driverless future. I now _like_ that someone somewhere has a book listing chemicals that aren't allowed to be shipped on an airplane, and…

The streets where I live have giant pot holes.

The government had the job of creating a flat surface. I got a surface with holes in it.

If we had a competent government they could probably just upgrade the roads nation wide with smart sensors that cars can use for guiding - along with a integration module for car manufacturers to use. But we don't have that kind of competency, so for now we're stuck with Google and Apple.

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#55

Post by beep_boop_beep »

smokeyj wrote: post #41
akgerber wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason why consumer/enterprise software is so lightly regulated is that very few people die when mistakes are made. (Embedded, especially medical, is a different story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 ) Meanwhile, cars (and roadways designed for high speeds without proper pedestrian accommodations) have been the #1 cause of injury deaths for kids for generations: https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/Leading…

> The reason why consumer/enterprise software is so lightly regulated is that very few people die when mistakes are made So few people die because computers are nearly unregulated and mass manufactured. Computers are cheap and safe because we allow the market to function.

I can see how it seems that way but actually almost every component of a computer must pass FCC certification, not to mention any certification in other markets. Take wifi modules for instance, they must conform to each countries regulations regarding spectrum usage and in Europe at least, they are restricted by output power unless you apply for a radio operator license. Yet wifi is EVERYWHERE.

That's not even getting into the fact that almost every piece of tech has an alliance or standards committee which decides how devices using that tech will operate, conform to standards and how those devices will play nice with similar devices or operate with devices on older iterations of that tech.

The IT industry only works the way it does because it's one of the most tightly controlled, planned out and well documented industries in human history.

Without those standards and regulations the whole industry would be a shit show of epic proportions with everyone putting out closed systems and poor, if any compatibility with other systems or components.

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#56

Post by MBCook »

criddell wrote: post #42
ghaff wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will also be somewhat new ground. As I've noted before, there are relatively few examples of consumer-facing technologies/products where properly maintained and used (or sometimes even misused) products kill and maim--and people are just fine with that because "stuff happens" and the cost/benefit is reasonable. Drug interactions are one of the relatively few areas today and even those often lead to lawsuits. (And…

Maybe self-driving car companies should be indemnified for anything other than gross-negligence until the technology matures a little.

That will probably have to happen at some point.

My big concern is we’ve seen how reckless companies have been (Samsung with Note 7 batteries, Facebook/Twitter with the election, AirBNB(?) with reviews about unsafe places, Uber with basically everything...) I don’t want those companies making self driving cars without strong oversight. ‘Move fast and break things’ has done a lot of damage over the last few years.

I don’t want them to be allowed to apply that strategy to cars. We couldn’t trust their judgement for simpler things, the risk is way too high for cars.

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#57

Post by ghostbrainalpha »

menacingly wrote: post #13

There was a time when I thought of regulations as progress killers, but I find myself shifting on that and getting nervous every time I hear about self-driving tech. It's great stuff, but I really do not want my family to be the brave eggs we had to crack to get to the omelet of a driverless future. I now _like_ that someone somewhere has a book listing chemicals that aren't allowed to be shipped on an airplane, and…

I know you just want to keep your family safe, me too.

But consider my case. I have NO traffic tickets on my record, but I recently started taking a medication that could cause sudden blackouts. I am still allowed to drive.

I also have an ADDICTION to mobile games. I try to limit my playing to stop lights, but if traffic seems light, I will try to get away with crushing a few candies while driving. Studies have shown this is MORE dangerous than drunk driving, but I don't feel like it is because again, I don't even have any tickets on my record.

Yes, I have had a few close calls, and hit a few curbs, but I'm not stopping what I'm doing anytime soon. In fact I just got a mount for my dashboard so I can watch Youtube videos while I drive, so the problem is getting worse.

I consider myself a good person, and a responsible person in general, but I will probably be responsible for a horrible accident at some point before I actually change my behavior. I'm hoping the self driving cars get here before that happens, because my attention holding skills and driving ability are on a serious downward trajectory.

EDIT: To the people who got upset by this. I am sorry. This was Trollish behavior. I took patterns that I am seeing, and tried to personify them to make it more effective.

You can see from some of my past posts, I have real concern about where smart phones are taking us, and I took my argument too far. I really did lose someone close to me because they were hit by a driver that was looking at a dick pic and not paying attention to the road. This has permanently effected my perspective on this issue.

Also... the medication I was referring to was a normal SSRI Anti-depressant. These don't have any warnings about "operating heavy machinery", and are totally legal to take while driving. They don't cause black outs, but actual seizures in some people.

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#59

Post by weaksauce »

patejam wrote: post #46
distances wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are also other ways to successfully lower the death count, but as the recent NY Times column [0] says the American culture is working hard against any improvements based on restrictions. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/opinion/america-is-now-an...

Is it fair to compare the US to Europe? US has an extremely different driving culture than Europe. ~13500miles/year for the US; ~8000miles/year for Europe. ~800 cars per 1000 people in the US; ~550-600 per 1000 in Europe. Also, a larger number of people in the US simply couldn't live life without a car. I'm sitting in my hometown, a mere hour drive away from the largest city in the US, and I'd have to walk 45min to t…

The cars in Europe are generally much smaller too.

Re: Apple scientists disclose self-driving car research

#60

Post by scotu »

loeg wrote: post #48
mononcqc wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could also just reduce driving deaths by having better public transportation and reducing driving overall. Sounds like it would even be better in the long run.

> just It's not as easy as you make it sound. Americans still want cars.

...because the marketing department tells them they do?
Post reply on HN