San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on • Hacker News Board

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#241

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:43 PM UTC

CogitoCogito wrote: post #151

AmericanChopper wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am really worried by the fact that I am the unwilling tester in the Great Driverless Car Experiment. You’re basically an non-consenting tester for every piece of innovation that society every has/ever will come up with, in one way or another. It’s an unavoidable feature of living on the same planet as 8 billion other people. Perhaps the safety of this technology does need to improve, or perhaps not. But there’s n…

> You’re basically an non-consenting tester for every piece of innovation that society every has/ever will come up with, in one way or another. It’s an unavoidable feature of living on the same planet as 8 billion other people. Perhaps the safety of this technology does need to improve, or perhaps not. But there’s no level of improvement that would ever be able to satisfy this outrage you’ve expressed at something ne…

[deleted]

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#242

Post by Fernicia » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:43 PM UTC

CogitoCogito wrote: post #151

AmericanChopper wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am really worried by the fact that I am the unwilling tester in the Great Driverless Car Experiment. You’re basically an non-consenting tester for every piece of innovation that society every has/ever will come up with, in one way or another. It’s an unavoidable feature of living on the same planet as 8 billion other people. Perhaps the safety of this technology does need to improve, or perhaps not. But there’s n…

> You’re basically an non-consenting tester for every piece of innovation that society every has/ever will come up with, in one way or another. It’s an unavoidable feature of living on the same planet as 8 billion other people. Perhaps the safety of this technology does need to improve, or perhaps not. But there’s no level of improvement that would ever be able to satisfy this outrage you’ve expressed at something ne…

They are speaking more broadly. Every day you walk past buildings with novel construction features, planes fly overhead without your permission, the ingredients to the food you eat change without your knowledge or consent.

It's a simple fact of life that you test things without explicitly consenting. The driverless cars are no different.

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#243

Post by Steltek » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:44 PM UTC

MathCodeLove wrote: post #163

jcranmer wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Already today, cars do not travel at 40mph in those areas with heavy pedestrian traffic--the typical speed limit on a city street is 25mph, and even that is probably above typical speeds. If you want cars to travel more quickly, you need to resort to highways that completely cut off pedestrian access, which has seriously deleterious effects on the neighborhoods it travels through. If you try to compromise, you end up…

Alright, but 25mph is still significantly faster than walking speed. I do think that mass transportation would be nice and we could use a better public trans infra in the US, but that doesn't make the fact that waking is still much less efficient that driving. Even with cars taking up much more space, a bunch of cars traveling at 25 mph are able to carry a many more people through a distance X in a period of time T t…

LOL, cars don't go anywhere near 25mph in Boston. They'll average 15mph, if they're lucky. Even with ~70% of the right of way allocated to cars, there's still too many of them for the road to handle. I don't know what "efficiency" you think cars have over other modes but I'm not seeing it on my commute. More often than not, my bike is stuck behind cars (because the bike lane disappeared) rather than they're stuck behind me.

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#244

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:44 PM UTC

logifail wrote: post #34

bmitc wrote: post #2

I remain confused on how these cars are allowed on the road. Did they pass a driver's license check? Who's responsible? Who gets the ticket? In this instance, you can see that the car performed a dangerous maneuver by running from the cops, with its lights still off, and crossing an intersection, which is then spun by the company as finding a "safer" spot to pull over at. Even though, it found a spot essentially iden…

> Did they pass a driver's license check? Thought experiment: imagine a particular self-driving algo were to do something that would warrant a human driver getting their driving licence suspended, would that mean all the cars with that same algo would be simultanously suspended, or just that one car?

[deleted]

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#245

Post by MathCodeLove » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #231

MathCodeLove wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2. No, sidewalks and bike lanes are for pedestrians and bicyclists. Bike lanes are less common than sidewalks so I think it's reasonable to include them on low-speed/highly congested stretches of road, but to assume they should have a full access to, e.g. and interstate or highway is ridiculous and would hinder literally thousands of people.

Sidewalks and bike lanes are not contiguous. Pedestrians and cyclists are not only permitted, but have the right of way, on nearly all roads other than controlled access highways and tunnels, even where sidewalks and bike lanes exist.

Yes but this conversation was about jaywalking and what roads are intended for. No one (I think) is arguing that a bike crossing the rode to go from one bike lane to another is wrong, but that it isn't the intended purpose of roads. Pedestrians do have the right away, but that doesn't make jaywalking illegal, it just makes it so drivers are (rightfully) held accountable for running over pedestrians trying to cross the street. It doesn't give a pedestrian the right to walk down the middle of the street at a leisurely pace

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#246

Post by mhh__ » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:46 PM UTC

tremon wrote: post #233

mhh__ wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you'd be immediately unhappy if you crashed your parents car

In the typical teenager's mind, that would be after , not if

We are discussing a hypothetical teenager who doesn't exist, who knows?

Besides, I had thousands of HN karma (the most important metric of maturity of course) when I was a teenager not very long ago.

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#247

Post by lubujackson » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:47 PM UTC

The real surprise here is that SF police pulled over a car at all. Have been here for more than a decade and I can count the times I have seen a car pulled over in SF on one finger - meanwhile, I have seen numerous cars blow through red lights, speeding, U-turns in the middle of the street etc. in front of police with no response.

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#248

Post by pempem » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:47 PM UTC

tremon wrote: post #233

mhh__ wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you'd be immediately unhappy if you crashed your parents car

In the typical teenager's mind, that would be after , not if

Was it an "if" in yours when you were a teenager? There are lots of strong statistical differences that are visible in the teenage population and trickle their way into insurance tables.

Basically we could do a better job engendering concern from teenagers, its not some kind of inherent mental lack of capability.

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#249

Post by dntrkv » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:47 PM UTC

CogitoCogito wrote: post #151

AmericanChopper wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am really worried by the fact that I am the unwilling tester in the Great Driverless Car Experiment. You’re basically an non-consenting tester for every piece of innovation that society every has/ever will come up with, in one way or another. It’s an unavoidable feature of living on the same planet as 8 billion other people. Perhaps the safety of this technology does need to improve, or perhaps not. But there’s n…

> You’re basically an non-consenting tester for every piece of innovation that society every has/ever will come up with, in one way or another. It’s an unavoidable feature of living on the same planet as 8 billion other people. Perhaps the safety of this technology does need to improve, or perhaps not. But there’s no level of improvement that would ever be able to satisfy this outrage you’ve expressed at something ne…

Let’s say autonomous cars, once fully implemented, are even 10% safer than existing drivers. And testing in real-world conditions, speeds up the implementation by even just a year. We would need about 3k deaths at the hands of the autonomous drivers before the trade off was no longer worth it. This is only considering the US. And based on very conservative estimates of 10% improvement and a reduction of only a year savings in time to deploy. The more likely scenario will put that number in the 10s of thousands in my opinion.

Personally, I would much rather we slowly develop and deploy these cars in the wild rather than continue testing in some controlled environments. At least this way we can monitor progress and judge their readiness as a society. Plus, the sooner they happen, the better for everyone.

Re: San Francisco cops pull over a Cruise driverless car for no lights on

#250

Post by pempem » Mon, Apr 11, 2022, 2:48 PM UTC

ricochet11 wrote: post #156

bo1024 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add to your point: it doesn’t bother me so much that the AI system doesn’t share these priorities. What I worry about is that the companies designing them are not incentivized to.

surely a company is absolutely incentivized to share these priorities? every accident is a hit to their profits and pr.

I think Tesla has shown this fairly clearly to be untrue.

It takes a hit if there isnt' a very solid marketing/pr/charismatic leader to distract