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

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

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 504 posts

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

#401

Post by IgorPartola »

bin_bash wrote: post #368
IgorPartola wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been working on my vehicles for a while. Removing the fuse or unplugging the lights is stupid easy.

I don't know how you've come to the conclusion that's a reasonable solution. Wiring harnesses on cars are a pain in the ass and definitely are not heavy duty enough for being removed many times. With a fuse you have to find the fuse box, remove the cover, find which fuse to remove, then pull it out with pliers. It's far more work than you're implying. Also, this is done every time I take my car in for service whether…

What are you talking about? Remove plastic cover from fuse box. Remove fuse. Done.

Or open hood. Unplug bulb. Done.

Also most times when you work on a vehicle it is off.

Have you actually had this problem yourself? Or are you doing this on behalf of imaginary other people?

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

#402

Post by newaccount74 »

throwawayboise wrote: post #315
dylan604 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, except, I'm not sure where the 100,000km condition was established. I'm in North Texas, so I have a personal rule that if the temps are forecasted to be below freezing with any form of precipitation, I do not leave the house. People make moronic decisions on how to drive in those conditions because it doesn't happen enough and as a collective, proper ability to drive is forgotten every single time.

That is my experience from one visit to the Arlington area years ago. One morning it was below freezing and there were some icy patches especially on bridges. Drivers were either creeping at 2mph or spinning out. There didn't seem to be anyone on the road who knew how to handle it.

How do you drive on icy roads though? Creeping at 2mph sounds like a reasonable choice, at least you won't make a lot of damage when you slowly slide into an obstacle.

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

#403

Post by brimble »

conductr wrote: post #386
jwr wrote: post #72

I am really worried by the fact that I am the unwilling tester in the Great Driverless Car Experiment. Tradition has it that when you load-test a new bridge, you put the architect underneath. I feel like this, except I didn't design those driverless cars, somebody else did. Being an experienced software engineer, my trust in the software in these cars is pretty low. And yet they are testing them on me, because I can…

My wife's 96 year old grandfather still has a driver's license because he passes some ridiculous vision test with 1 of his eyes. He can't read a newspaper or see a television well enough to enjoy sports (previously his favorite thing). He says he's memorized the vision test at his doctor's office and when asked the doctor refuses to file a report (or whatever procedural thing is required to remove his driving abiliti…

A huge percentage of elderly drivers shouldn't be on the road. We (the US) seem, as a society, to have decided to just live with that rather than trying to make it easier to live here without a car.

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

#404

Post by colinmhayes »

root_axis wrote: post #377
dfxm12 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That teenage driver goes through a training and certification process, and we have ways of stopping them from driving if they fuck up too badly. This is a complete aside, but not having a license doesn't really prevent you from getting in a car and driving it. I was just reminded of this when a buddy's parked car was struck by a drunk driver who was not legally licensed to drive because their license was revoked from…

Kind of a moot point though. You can't really stop anyone from doing anything, the best we can do in a free society is create laws that deter undesirable behavior.

Or maybe we can hurry up with driverless cars so that we can take the wheel out asap for people who have DUIs.

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

#405

Post by Vladimof »

dylan604 wrote: post #385
Vladimof wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are LOTS of AMP links floating around... most people don't even know that they depend on it...

sorry, i guess i should have ended my original post with /s

that's ok... I'm just glad that (as far as I know) all APM URLs are easy to identify visually... they will probably change that in version 2

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

#406

Post by colinmhayes »

jonny_eh wrote: post #375
s1artibartfast wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? It is a good and relevant point.

Because it justifies their actions. Would we be quoting him if he didn't murder innocent people?

I don't think his murders invalidate his manifesto. Luditeism has been very popular since the industrial revolution, I think it's reasonably likely we would be talking about Industrial Society and its Future or something similar if he hadn't killed people.

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

#407

Post by MathCodeLove »

Steltek wrote: post #391
MathCodeLove wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

15mph is still faster than walking speed. I'm not saying cars are the most optimally efficient mode of transportation, just that they are much more efficient that walking.

That's a completely useless comparison that applies almost no where in the world? You need to compare driving vs pervasive transit and bike networks. I doubt New Yorkers or Amsterdammers would accept your efficient car hypothesis. In the few places with high 100% walking commutes, I don't see cars being more efficient either. Do you want every college student to drive from their dorm to class? How about poor countrie…

Are you joking? That applies in the vast majority of the world, the exceptions you named are just that, exceptions that are exceptionally rare.

This entire discussion started as whether pedestrians should/shouldn't be on roads. No, they shouldn't. They should be on a sidewalk, best of both worlds.

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

#408

Post by colinmhayes »

IgorPartola wrote: post #88

Being used to riding motorcycles in the US, why are headlights not always on for all vehicles at this point? LED bulbs last a very long time and there is little reason to not have them on during the day. I know, it’s much more fun to anthropomorphize the car in this case, but the simple solution is to just hard wire them.

I mean they can be pretty annoying on some cars whose manufactures have decided its ok to have the beams right at eye level.

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

#409

Post by LocalPCGuy »

jwr wrote: post #72

I am really worried by the fact that I am the unwilling tester in the Great Driverless Car Experiment. Tradition has it that when you load-test a new bridge, you put the architect underneath. I feel like this, except I didn't design those driverless cars, somebody else did. Being an experienced software engineer, my trust in the software in these cars is pretty low. And yet they are testing them on me, because I can…

Personally, any % above "average human driving skill" reliably should start to see more uptake of this new technology. Driverless cars have and will kill people. Sometimes it will be due to programming errors. But on the whole, they are, in many cases, on par or better than human drivers. I think it's good to be cautious, for the industry to be cautious. But I don't want to see people freaking out over a single accident because it involved an AI when there are thousands of non-AI accidents every day. Be consistent in judging them, not against some mythical 100% success rate but against the criteria, is it better/safer than most drivers.

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

#410

Post by nsv »

jonny_eh wrote: post #326
snikeris wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the problems with technology that Ted Kaczynski wrote about. You can't opt out. > Even the walker’s freedom is now greatly restricted. In the city he continually has to stop to wait for traffic lights that are designed mainly to serve auto traffic. In the country, motor traffic makes it dangerous and unpleasant to walk along the highway. (Note this important point that we have just illustrated with the…

We're quoting the Unabomber now? Certainly you can choose good quotes from non-serial killers.

This is an example of "ad hominem", a logical fallacy where you attack a person's character or attributes rather than the point being made.
Post reply on HN