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

Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 331 posts

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#171

Post by _carbyau_ »

jxf wrote: post #31
redtriumph wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like having support for interpreting human gestures will solve some of the problems. But how do we distinguish real emergency scenario from fake one? Such kinds of problems will only scale up as we apply L5 cars take on more public roads, but I wonder how long or what changes will have to be done in current road signs, critical city infra to support them.

> But how do we distinguish real emergency scenario from fake one? A car shouldn't make that call. It should err on the side of safety and assuming the emergency is real. When you see flashing lights on the highway coming up behind you, do you think "I bet that ambulance is faking it so they can get home faster", or do you just move over?

I agree with treat it as real. Then, if the car has an adult passenger you can ask them for their judgement (and responsibility for the outcome!)

If the car has no passenger. Then stop and move slowly as required/indicated. Sure, it may be a car thief, but without a passenger, it is simply another car theft.

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#172

Post by Zircom »

colechristensen wrote: post #87
retrac wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm slightly alarmed by the general scenario of a driverless vehicle approaching an emergency situation. A human-driven vehicle will respond to gestures from firefighters to go around, etc. And even most dull humans will have more situational awareness and flexibility than an AI is likely to, particularly as these sorts of scenarios are edge cases by definition. E.g. depending on your jurisdiction and the situation,…

> Software is not ready for that yet, I think. It will never happen. Robots will never have the intelligence to manage dangerous situations in the open world, only in controlled environments. After a series of accidents passes the unforgivable threshold, certain levels of autonomous driving will be banned completely.

I think never is a strong word. You genuine believe that we'll never create an equivalent or even comparable intelligence to our own artificially?

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#173

Post by mr_toad »

robocat wrote: post #112
guardiangod wrote: post #103

Cant the driver-less car, when it sees a fire truck, automatically stop the car at a safe location? Then if the fire truck did not move after 3 minutes, re-route to get away from the fire truck?

Next headlines: Driverless cars cause traffic jam at accident scene. Driverless cars cause traffic jam while tenders waiting at traffic lights.

There were numerous instances of the cars blocking traffic mentioned in the report. Someone decided that they weren’t headline material.

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#174

Post by ctoth »

goodpoint wrote: post #159
drdaeman wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Passenger safety concerns? If anyone would be able to stop an autonomous vehicle, it may be not always in the passenger's best interest. Could be OK if the passenger has an override, though - if they decide to tell the car to not comply with a legitimate stop request, it should be treated as if they'd be driving themselves and refused to stop. And, obviously, emergency stop should initiate stopping, but the vehicle s…

> it may be not always in the passenger's best interest What is a realistic scenario here? Unless you are in a tank in a warzone... How is a traditional, non-self driving car protecting you from someone pointing a gun at you? Do you have bullet-proof glass and bodywork?

Here[0] is a realistic scenario from last week near me. Just checked. No tanks involved. You can decide for yourself if it is a warzone.

Note: OP edited the post after my response. Would be good if HN indicated this.

[0]: Cherry Creek carjacking prompts other victims to come forward https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/cherry-creek-carjackin...

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#175

Post by flandish »

mindcrime wrote: post #2

Less anybody think "this is no big deal", let me assure you as a former firefighter, cars driving over fire hoses is a MAJOR deal. Whether the car is driven by a human or AI. And sadly, humans do this all too often anyway. FWIW, the reason(s) this is bad - if not obvious - include: - The hose can (and does) get snagged on the car's under-carriage, which can rip it away from a hydrant, or engine, or yank an attack lin…

Just saying, as another firefighter, this post above is fantastic.

To add: a vehicle driving over a hose also means a vehicle is likely to be “in” the scene operating area. Random cars where we don’t expect them can lead to all sorts of injury.

Granted, as a truck comp guy, I often had to deal with engine guys not leaving room - but first due is first due. ;)

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#177

Post by alasdair_ »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #57
Swenrekcah wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then you have essentially enabled everyone to wave your car to a stop, which could be very convenient for certain types of people. I think the simple truth is that we are still a long long long time away from fully autonomous cars to be safely deployed anywhere except on very specific paths that are mostly closed off to everyone else. But they could be tremendously useful there, for instance driving buses or airp…

So this is currently possible today: I can walk out on any street today and redirect traffic. With or without my reflective vest, drivers will generally listen to me. And self-driving vehicles must as well. Note that when I am doing traffic direction with appropriate authority, most drivers will never have heard of the organization I'm a part of (a local CERT team), nor have any real way to vet the authority I have.…

>most drivers will never have heard of the organization I'm a part of (a local CERT team)

Will you have to file a CVE after the incident?

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#178

Post by shrimpx »

crazygringo wrote: post #24

Obviously autonomous vehicles need to be able to respond to officials directing traffic for any reason -- making way for ambulances, stopping for firefighters, being pulled over for a faulty headlight. Surely Cruise and Waymo have thought about this. Curious how it's supposed to work normally, and whether something about it failed in this case? How is an official supposed to get a moving autonomous vehicle to stop or…

There should be a protocol where emergency workers can set up a geofence where cars are not allowed. Driverless cars can automatically avoid the geofence. Drivered cars can pop up an alert.

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#179

Post by alasdair_ »

colechristensen wrote: post #87
retrac wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm slightly alarmed by the general scenario of a driverless vehicle approaching an emergency situation. A human-driven vehicle will respond to gestures from firefighters to go around, etc. And even most dull humans will have more situational awareness and flexibility than an AI is likely to, particularly as these sorts of scenarios are edge cases by definition. E.g. depending on your jurisdiction and the situation,…

> Software is not ready for that yet, I think. It will never happen. Robots will never have the intelligence to manage dangerous situations in the open world, only in controlled environments. After a series of accidents passes the unforgivable threshold, certain levels of autonomous driving will be banned completely.

It will definitely happen, and likely (>50%) within the next 10-15 years.

We need true GAI to do this, of course, and the question is: will a "real" GAI be willing to drive a car? How much will we have to pay it?

Re: Firefighters forced to smash window of driverless Cruise taxi to stop it

#180

Post by BoorishBears »

retrac wrote: post #12
mindcrime wrote: post #2

Less anybody think "this is no big deal", let me assure you as a former firefighter, cars driving over fire hoses is a MAJOR deal. Whether the car is driven by a human or AI. And sadly, humans do this all too often anyway. FWIW, the reason(s) this is bad - if not obvious - include: - The hose can (and does) get snagged on the car's under-carriage, which can rip it away from a hydrant, or engine, or yank an attack lin…

I'm slightly alarmed by the general scenario of a driverless vehicle approaching an emergency situation. A human-driven vehicle will respond to gestures from firefighters to go around, etc. And even most dull humans will have more situational awareness and flexibility than an AI is likely to, particularly as these sorts of scenarios are edge cases by definition. E.g. depending on your jurisdiction and the situation,…

Teleoperations is a thing.
Post reply on HN