151–160 of 445 posts
Given the failure of the recognition + categorization system, it would be interesting to know what it thought it saw. Was it filed under IDK, a plastic bag blowing in the wind, what?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My theory is that people act like jerks behind the wheel, and come across as jerks even when they're not, because drivers have no way to apologize or ask please or do any other polite thing. All they can do is honk the horn, which is like yelling "HEY!!" If there were a communication mechanism for "excuse me, the light is green now" and "oops, so sorry, didn't see you there" driving would be easier and more pleasant.
Exactly! Every communication you try to make in a car can be interpreted as aggressiveness, which escalates anger on both sides. You need a way to de-escalate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. They said "preliminarily" the Uber driver was not at fault. Judging from the footage, that was reasonable. You can't put the blame off the woman, you can't just cross a road at night like that and expect to be noticed. Accidents like that happen all the time, it's only because of the self-driving car that this is newsworthy. Imagine if there wasn't any dashcam footage and this was a normal car with a distracted…
A distracted driver has the option to tell the police they were distracted. Or are you of the opinion that since the woman was dead it didn't matter anymore?
Second of all, what are the odds that a human who just killed a woman would admit even to themselves that they were the one to blame in such an accident? Practically zero. Cognitive dissonance won't allow it. In their minds, they weren't distracted, at least not enough to take any of the blame.
Produce accident on target individual within timeframeEarlier quoted context omitted.
> And welcome to why self-driving cars will always be 3 years away. It's also possible that human/pedestrian behavior will adapt to the consistent behavior of driverless cars.
Or jaywalking will become more strictly enforced with policing or physical barriers. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/4/2/automated-vehic...
I'm curious what degree of "cultural context" is built into automated cars - I feel that there has to be a lot of locale-specific techniques for driving. For example, in NYC, there's nothing at all uncommon about a pedestrian beginning to cross the street in front of you and approaching the area of your lane where you will shortly be. Pedestrians typically then stop about a foot away from your lane, let you drive pas…
There is an obvious solution: don't stop, just slow down to <25 mph. On the streets where it is normal for pedestrians to approach that close, the speed limit is almost always 25 mph or lower and often the typical speed is much lower because of traffic. On streets with higher speeds, if a pedestrian is approaching that close to traffic, they either don't see the car or they have a death wish.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cameras used in applications like these are not like your typical 24-bit RGB cameras in phones or webcams that need gain adjustment: their sensors support a very high range of brightness values (like "high dynamic range") - but the video released to the public and the media would be MPEG/H.26x/etc which do not support HDR - or at least most video players wouldn't. The police probably lacked the expertise to know…
The video was very obviously obtained from a dashcam solution that isn't actually used to do any of the autonomous driving. It's possible they don't even record the raw footage from the AI cameras, that's a huge bandwidth hog.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A distracted driver has the option to tell the police they were distracted. Or are you of the opinion that since the woman was dead it didn't matter anymore?
First of all, in this scenario, the woman would have at least shared some of the blame. Second of all, what are the odds that a human who just killed a woman would admit even to themselves that they were the one to blame in such an accident? Practically zero. Cognitive dissonance won't allow it. In their minds, they weren't distracted, at least not enough to take any of the blame.
Possibly. But a distracted driver is definitely at fault, no matter what. Driving is a full time occupation.
> Second of all, what are the odds that a human who just killed a woman would admit even to themselves that they were the one to blame in such an accident?
Pretty good. Most people are honest, even in a bad situation.
> Practically zero.
You speak for yourself.
> Cognitive dissonance won't allow it. In their minds, they weren't distracted, at least not enough to take any of the blame.
Well, you probably have your reasons for writing this under a novelty account. But it's clear that when you are at fault it is best for everybody involved to recognize that fact, even if it means discomfort for you.
I get that in todays climate it's what you can get away with, but I don't think that strategy will hold in the longer term. It's way each and every lawsuit is appealed to the highest courts because nobody bothers to just admit their errors and it's why when there is a car accident the perpetrators will sue the victims. But that's wrong on many levels and I refuse to subscribe to that view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a very good argument but I don't think it will come to pass, for this reason: http://theoatmeal.com/pl/minor_differences/cutting_off There's something about driving that turns ordinary people into assholes. I've observed it in myself. Bus passengers are much more considerate, and I think that passengers in self-driving vehicles will behave like passengers, not like drivers. So if a pedestrian cuts them off the…
My theory is that people act like jerks behind the wheel, and come across as jerks even when they're not, because drivers have no way to apologize or ask please or do any other polite thing. All they can do is honk the horn, which is like yelling "HEY!!" If there were a communication mechanism for "excuse me, the light is green now" and "oops, so sorry, didn't see you there" driving would be easier and more pleasant.
On freeways the same is used by cars coming from the opposite direction if there's a radar ahead.
Still, in peak hours pretty much everyone is a dick, even usually chill Uber drivers.
Edit: it's also used as a "sorry" signal too.
Also, this is not local. I've seen it used all around the country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This revolution should have started with mundane tasks, such as city street sweepers and perhaps garbage trucks. Honestly I would think that automating a slow moving vehicle in the city would be a much harder engineering challenge. City driving can be a lot messier than driving on the freeway.
The stakes are much lower though. A standard car drifting into the oncoming lane is basically death. If it can't handle city driving, the methods are probably too immature to put people's lives against.