Live data from Hacker News

California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

reuters.com

131–140 of 1001 posts

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#131
post #85
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like 30,000 Americans alone are killed every year in car accidents. I think the primary idea is to reduce the constant death on the road by making machines that are safer at driving than humans. The toll that car accidents have on society is honestly unconscionable.

That is a good point. A secondary benefit, is a self driving car can literally give most workers that commute about an hour per day of their lives back. For some people it will be two to three hours.

How is being stuck in a small box for an hour "getting that hour back"? Most people don't want to read a book during their commute, they want to have less commute, so they can do actual things they want, like play with their kids or cook dinner or enjoy a movie in the comfort of their own home.

"Fixing" commutes by making everyone sit alone in their car while it does the driving part as if that's the problem with an hour long commute, is the single dumbest way to make cities better.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#132

[flagged]

Besides what the other user pointed out, there are tens of millions of people driving an hour or more every day just to get to work, and that time sink might feel a bit more bearable if you could relax and do whatever you wanted during that time rather than focus on all the obstacles around you. I don't know that the state of self-driving vehicles will be quite there in my lifetime, but some time in the future they w…

> that time sink might feel a bit more bearable if you could relax and do whatever you wanted during that time rather than focus on all the obstacles around you

We could use... trains & buses. Self-driving trains and buses!

But self-driving individual cars, because they will make the time more bearable, will induce even more driving, which is the opposite of what we want.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Currently, the human driver responsible for the incident is still at large I welcome our robot overlords.

Amen. Really wish there was a way for tech (especially new AI tech) to wholesale abandon the city. Even just move south to the actual Silicon Valley. The city picking winners and losers like this is untenable

Cruise picked themselves as a loser by screwing up publicly and then trying to hide their problems.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#134

[flagged]

Who needs steam machines? Progress is always good IMO.

If you define progress as positive development, sure. But then that's just tautological.

If you mean it more generally, MattY would like to have a word. https://www.slowboring.com/p/the-techno-optimists-fallacy

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Currently, the human driver responsible for the incident is still at large I welcome our robot overlords.

Amen. Really wish there was a way for tech (especially new AI tech) to wholesale abandon the city. Even just move south to the actual Silicon Valley. The city picking winners and losers like this is untenable

The DMV (state agency) is pulling their permit, not SF.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#136

43k deaths per year due to human drivers. DMV should stop sticking their heads in the sand. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state... .

Though maybe good to have a system where a human remote driver takes over in cases where it's confused?

Cruise has exactly that. In this case however, the car decided to "pull over" autonomously after the incident, before a remote driver could get involved, and with that pulled the struck pedestrian 20 feet along the ground and pinned them under the vehicle. If it instead alerted a remote driver immediately and waited for their decision before moving again, this would've likely ended much more lightly.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#137

This is just anecdote, but having taken trips in both Waymo and Cruise in SF, I feel very comfortable in Waymo: it drives carefully but confidently. It alerts me when cyclists are near when I'm getting out. It navigates coned-off work areas. Cruise required a lot of (remote) human intervention during my trips.

We were sold self-driving cars as safer than humans.

And snake oil salesmen exist everywhere, not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that they should all be equally safe? If so that would require a level of oversight and control (plus knowledge share?) not typically seen in US government, no?

I agree in principle, I’m not defending them at all. However this is exactly what much of the US wants, given how much de regulation and reduced “red tape” is often argued for.

Until then, we’re going to get some companies that put everyone’s lives at risk. Hell Tesla alone has over promised to insane degrees (the Full in FSD). I don’t see companies having less power any time soon.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#138

This is just anecdote, but having taken trips in both Waymo and Cruise in SF, I feel very comfortable in Waymo: it drives carefully but confidently. It alerts me when cyclists are near when I'm getting out. It navigates coned-off work areas. Cruise required a lot of (remote) human intervention during my trips.

We were sold self-driving cars as safer than humans.

No one was sold anything yet. These things don't go from 0 to 100 overnight. We've assumed that self-driving cars will be safer than humans in the future, though that's yet to be determined. And even if their safety record is better than humans, they will be more dangerous in different ways than human drivers, much like this recent incident where the woman was dragged and pinned.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Currently, the human driver responsible for the incident is still at large I welcome our robot overlords.

Amen. Really wish there was a way for tech (especially new AI tech) to wholesale abandon the city. Even just move south to the actual Silicon Valley. The city picking winners and losers like this is untenable

This isn't sports, alas. Though I sometimes feel that way in a post-"stonk" society.

Some other factors are in play

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#140
post #2

Is there evidence that Cruise is more dangerous than a human driver?

I do not believe "it's as dangerous as a human driver" is a good reason to look past all the problems with self-driving cars. There should be a higher standard than that.

If X is already allowed, Y is a replacement for X, and Y is safer than X, then why wouldn't you want to allow Y?
Post reply on HN