Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street • Hacker News Board

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#681

Post by kevinwang » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:02 PM UTC

orbitur wrote: post #421

IgorPartola wrote: post #390

This is what's going to happen. If you've ever seen a machine learning algorithm in action, this isn't surprising at all. Basically, they'll behave as expected some well known percentage of the time. But when they don't, the result will not be just a slight deviation from the normal algorithm, but a very unexpected one. So we will have overall a much smaller number of deaths caused by self driving cars, but ones that…

> I won't be surprised if someone at some point wears a stripy outfit, and the car thinks they are a part of the road, and tries to explicitly chase them down until they are under the wheels. Or if the car suddenly decides that the road continues at a 90 degree angle off a bridge. Or that the splashes from a puddle in front is actually an oncoming car and it must swerve into the school kids crossing the perpendicular…

To be fair, all the examples you gave could also happen to a human driver.

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#682

Post by pbhjpbhj » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:03 PM UTC

Had the car passed the driving test?

There should probably be a specific, complex and comprehensive test for autonomous vehicles. Also I'd want to see shared liability, the company are driving it (by proxy through their software) so they should be liable to some extent.

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#683

Post by jastanton » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:03 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #568

jonthepirate wrote: post #415

Former Lyft eng here. From my vantage point, as an industry, we're nowhere near where we should be on the safety side. The tech companies are developing driving tech privately instead of openly. Why can a private for profit company "test" their systems on the public roads? The public is at serious risk of getting run over by hacked and buggy guidance / decision system. Even when a human operator has his hands hoverin…

Perhaps companies need to test their safety devices first. I.e., first prove that their LiDAR correctly identifies pedestrians, cyclists, etc. From there, build test-vehicles with redundancy, e.g. with multiple LiDAR devices. Then prove that the vehicles actually stop in case of emergency. And only then actually hit the road. Of course, the US department of transportation should have set up proper certification for a…

What you're describing is a driving test that every human needs to go through before they're allowed to drive on public roads. Something that can be revoked temporarily or permanently.

I would be very interested in a 3rd party (government or private) create a rigorous test (obstacles, weather conditions, etc...) for self driving vehicles. Becoming "XXX safety Certified with a Y Score" for all major updates to the AI could help restore confidence in the system and eliminate bad actors.

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#684

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:03 PM UTC

jonthepirate wrote: post #415

Former Lyft eng here. From my vantage point, as an industry, we're nowhere near where we should be on the safety side. The tech companies are developing driving tech privately instead of openly. Why can a private for profit company "test" their systems on the public roads? The public is at serious risk of getting run over by hacked and buggy guidance / decision system. Even when a human operator has his hands hoverin…

[deleted]

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#685

Post by ivoras » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:04 PM UTC

jonthepirate wrote: post #415

Former Lyft eng here. From my vantage point, as an industry, we're nowhere near where we should be on the safety side. The tech companies are developing driving tech privately instead of openly. Why can a private for profit company "test" their systems on the public roads? The public is at serious risk of getting run over by hacked and buggy guidance / decision system. Even when a human operator has his hands hoverin…

When regular cars first appeared, were they not tested "live" immediately? And yes, there was FUD even back then, and in parts of the world a backslash which resulted in sometimes silly safety rules.

The largest real difference seems to be the speed of communication nowadays, the rate at which public opinion can be manufactured and globally spread.

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#686

Post by breischl » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:04 PM UTC

ubernostrum wrote: post #409

Johnny555 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving cars are still subject to the laws of physics... unless you're going to dictate that self-driving cars never go above 15mph, I wouldn't advocate jumping in front of even a "perfect" self-driving car. Braking distance (without including any decision time) for a 15mph car is 11 ft, for a 30mph is 45 ft. Self driving cars won't change these limits. (well, they may be a little better than humans at maximizin…

Once upon a time when I was learning to drive, one of the exercises my instructor used was to put me in the passenger seat while he drove, and have me try to point out every person or vehicle capable of entering the lane he was driving in, as soon as I became aware of them. Every parked vehicle along the side of a road. Every vehicle approaching or waiting to enter an intersection. Every pedestrian standing by a cros…

That sounds like a great exercise, I wish it was standard. But I'm guessing you must have taken this course in a rural area, or else be able to talk faster than an auction caller. I don't think I could list off all the hazards in an urban area fast enough. :)

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#687

Post by mojomark » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:04 PM UTC

Mononokay wrote: post #345

abalone wrote: post #292

This may not have been an unexpected circumstance. The "pedestrian outside of the crosswalk" report is likely wrong. There is visual evidence that strongly supports that this was a case of the Uber hitting a bicyclist while merging into the right turn lane. Here's a picture of the crumpled bicycle (note dent on the front right of the car): https://twitter.com/daiwaka/status/975767445859287042 The sign it is lying nex…

This is looking worse and worse for Uber.

This is making Kitty Hawk look a lot more attractive.

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#688

Post by t0mbstone » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:05 PM UTC

Based on landmarks from the photo from the news article, and the fact that the accident supposedly happened near Mill and Curry, I'm assuming that this was the location of the accident:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Mill+Ave+%26+E+Curry+Rd,...

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#689

Post by morogop » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:05 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #568

jonthepirate wrote: post #415

Former Lyft eng here. From my vantage point, as an industry, we're nowhere near where we should be on the safety side. The tech companies are developing driving tech privately instead of openly. Why can a private for profit company "test" their systems on the public roads? The public is at serious risk of getting run over by hacked and buggy guidance / decision system. Even when a human operator has his hands hoverin…

Perhaps companies need to test their safety devices first. I.e., first prove that their LiDAR correctly identifies pedestrians, cyclists, etc. From there, build test-vehicles with redundancy, e.g. with multiple LiDAR devices. Then prove that the vehicles actually stop in case of emergency. And only then actually hit the road. Of course, the US department of transportation should have set up proper certification for a…

You've hit upon one of the most obvious ways to improve the safety of these systems. Deploy the systems more broadly, without giving them active control.

Then, you can start to identify situations where the driver's actions were outside of a predicted acceptable range, and investigate what happened.

Additionally, if you have a large pool of equipped vehicles you can identify every crash (or even more minor events, like hitting potholes or road debris) and see what the self-driving system would have done.

The realistic problem is that Uber doesn't give a shit. As such, deployment will never be optimized for public safety. It will be optimized for Uber's speed to market.

Re: Self-driving Uber car kills Arizona woman crossing street

#690

Post by osrec » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:05 PM UTC

jonthepirate wrote: post #415

Former Lyft eng here. From my vantage point, as an industry, we're nowhere near where we should be on the safety side. The tech companies are developing driving tech privately instead of openly. Why can a private for profit company "test" their systems on the public roads? The public is at serious risk of getting run over by hacked and buggy guidance / decision system. Even when a human operator has his hands hoverin…

You are right on the money. Also, why must self driving cars be on the roads with human drivers at all? We're an unpredictable bunch, and lives are at stake! We should simplify the problem domain and keep self driving cars away from other human drivers and pedestrians (even once the technology reaches a very advanced stage). When they are actually ready to go mainstream, then think about putting them on roads with humans (and even then, dedicated routes and infrastructure specifically for self driving cars may be the safer way to go).