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

The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 86 posts

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#51

Post by agumonkey »

DanBC wrote: post #48
seszett wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for one people do not expect drivers to stop at a green light, like was the case here. You might wish everybody was well aware of their environment, but the fact is, a green light is a strong signal that makes people assume the other drivers are moving or are going to. The second point is completely off-topic, as the car in question had plenty of space between them and the Google car's rear-end. It just failed…

Perhaps this is a cultural thing? Over here green means proceed with caution. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm... > GREEN means you may go on if the way is clear. Take special care if you intend to turn left or right and give way to pedestrians who are crossing" You seem to be saying that people are shitty drivers and that we need to either just put up with it, or fit our cars to stop some…

There's two things, bad people and bad drivers. Schools can only teach proper driving, not proper behavior. And schools are doing a sub-par job IMO. There are so many things you are not taught there or are in a hand-wavy fashion.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#52

Post by JibberMeTimbers »

ousta wrote: post #30

a quick question. heres the situation I am in a self driving car driving full speed on the highway, a little girl crosses the highway (highly unprobable but still possible) what will my car do? maintain high speed and kill her? or try to avoid her knowing that any attemps to avoid collision at this speed would likely injure me if not kill me? then how the car would react if it is a deer? then how the car will be 100%…

We can throw the same question right back at you. What would you do - kill the girl or kill yourself?

These hypotheticals don't really help the conversation. I don't know how the car would react but it would be nice to know if the car is going to try and work with neighboring cars to try and not hurt anyone. Not to mention that the car will already see the girl crossing the highway before she ever does get out there because of how sophisticated the sensors are.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#53

Post by ghaff »

DanBC wrote: post #48
seszett wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for one people do not expect drivers to stop at a green light, like was the case here. You might wish everybody was well aware of their environment, but the fact is, a green light is a strong signal that makes people assume the other drivers are moving or are going to. The second point is completely off-topic, as the car in question had plenty of space between them and the Google car's rear-end. It just failed…

Perhaps this is a cultural thing? Over here green means proceed with caution. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm... > GREEN means you may go on if the way is clear. Take special care if you intend to turn left or right and give way to pedestrians who are crossing" You seem to be saying that people are shitty drivers and that we need to either just put up with it, or fit our cars to stop some…

And you should always drive at the speed limit and come to a complete stop at stop signs. And yellow does not mean accelerate.

Lots of non-shitty drivers do not follow every road rule to the letter under every circumstance and, indeed, it's not always possible to especially without pissing off everyone around you.

I actually agree with the basic point that it's the following driver who has 99% of the responsibility not to run into the car ahead. That said, there are plenty of behaviors like coming to unnecessarily abrupt stops in unexpected places (which I'm not saying is the case here) that will absolutely lead to people running into you.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#54

Post by Lawtonfogle »

seszett wrote: post #40
DanBC wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> stopped in a place other drivers might not expect You should expect drivers to stop at intersections. You should normally leave enough space between you and the car in front to avoid rear-end collision, even if that car stops suddenly. And there's already a signal the car in front has slowed - their brake lights come on. (Maybe that's not a US thing though?)

Well, for one people do not expect drivers to stop at a green light, like was the case here. You might wish everybody was well aware of their environment, but the fact is, a green light is a strong signal that makes people assume the other drivers are moving or are going to. The second point is completely off-topic, as the car in question had plenty of space between them and the Google car's rear-end. It just failed…

>Well, for one people do not expect drivers to stop at a green light, like was the case here.

This is bad driving. You use the brake lights (and if you haven't seen the break lights working, you use the visual speed til you confirm the break lights are working) to determine of a car is going to stop. You should never put yourself in a position where any other factors are involved in if the car in front of you will stop or not.

> a green light is a strong signal that makes people assume the other drivers are moving or are going to.

And such drivers are to be held responsible for crashes and should be educated when found. Those who do not change should lose the privilege of driving.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#55

Post by Lawtonfogle »

JibberMeTimbers wrote: post #52
ousta wrote: post #30

a quick question. heres the situation I am in a self driving car driving full speed on the highway, a little girl crosses the highway (highly unprobable but still possible) what will my car do? maintain high speed and kill her? or try to avoid her knowing that any attemps to avoid collision at this speed would likely injure me if not kill me? then how the car would react if it is a deer? then how the car will be 100%…

We can throw the same question right back at you. What would you do - kill the girl or kill yourself? These hypotheticals don't really help the conversation. I don't know how the car would react but it would be nice to know if the car is going to try and work with neighboring cars to try and not hurt anyone. Not to mention that the car will already see the girl crossing the highway before she ever does get out there…

>What would you do - kill the girl or kill yourself?

Unless the AI behind these cars are so advanced that we cannot know ahead of time what it would do and it cannot be put in a simulation to test it, there is a vast difference between a self driving car and a human. Namely, we don't (and with the current level of knowledge can't) know what a human will do til after the situation occurs. And in general, in snap judgment cases like this, we do not punish a person for making a bad choice unless it is outright malicious.

Contrary to this, a self driving car is in a system who we can attempt to simulate (though not at perfect fidelity) and one where we know the underlying algorithms enough to answer the question and even change the algorithms to change the answer before the situation ever occurs.

>Not to mention that the car will already see the girl crossing the highway before she ever does get out there because of how sophisticated the sensors are.

This is attacking the situation instead of answering it. All I would have to do is modify the situation slightly and the question would remain just as valid and thus the response does nothing but postpone.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#56

Post by Lawtonfogle »

Khao wrote: post #31
ousta wrote: post #30

a quick question. heres the situation I am in a self driving car driving full speed on the highway, a little girl crosses the highway (highly unprobable but still possible) what will my car do? maintain high speed and kill her? or try to avoid her knowing that any attemps to avoid collision at this speed would likely injure me if not kill me? then how the car would react if it is a deer? then how the car will be 100%…

I trust a highly trained algorithm to make better and faster decision than a human driver. The algorithm is even aware of all the cars around it and their speed and can decide to take evasive action with a way better chance of success than I ever could.

It will better be able to make a decision than a human can. But what decision is optimal isn't well defined because never before have we had the need to define it. So far, only directly malicious behavior is known to be bad. But prioritizing your safety over the girls safety is something we have neither decided to be good or bad.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#57

Post by Lawtonfogle »

brixon wrote: post #38
Khao wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I trust a highly trained algorithm to make better and faster decision than a human driver. The algorithm is even aware of all the cars around it and their speed and can decide to take evasive action with a way better chance of success than I ever could.

It should be a three tier decision. First, preserve the life in the vehicle. Second, preserve life outside of the vehicle. Third, minimize property damage. Deer vs little girl does not really matter, that is just an emotional ploy.

How do we take into account emotional harm from killing a little girl causes the driver to be harmed (they weren't driving at the time as they let the car to stake over, but they blame themself for it regardless). A parent would rather they die than hit their own kid.

I guess once these cars begin being sold people can start testing situations using dummies and such.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#58

Post by Touche »

inthewoods wrote: post #20

These cars could be so freeing for so many segments of society. I agree with everyone that reducing the commuting annoyance would be awesome - imagine not having to worry about parking your car in the city anymore. You drive in on a highway at 90mph, get dropped off and then the car goes home or onto another task or gets shared out. Amazing. I'm even more excited about getting the elderly out of their homes safely, a…

That would be incredibly wasteful. Double the cost of gas, double the environmental damage, much worse traffic because cars are going home by themselves with no passenger, then returning to get the passenger later.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#59

Post by defilade »

Touche wrote: post #58
inthewoods wrote: post #20

These cars could be so freeing for so many segments of society. I agree with everyone that reducing the commuting annoyance would be awesome - imagine not having to worry about parking your car in the city anymore. You drive in on a highway at 90mph, get dropped off and then the car goes home or onto another task or gets shared out. Amazing. I'm even more excited about getting the elderly out of their homes safely, a…

That would be incredibly wasteful. Double the cost of gas, double the environmental damage, much worse traffic because cars are going home by themselves with no passenger, then returning to get the passenger later.

Not really. In a future of self-driving cars most people won't even own their own car so most of these cars will be shared - essentially automated taxis. So after the car drops you off it will go to its next call or park somewhere until someone calls it.

Re: The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car, Chapter 2

#60

Post by secabeen »

defilade wrote: post #59
Touche wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be incredibly wasteful. Double the cost of gas, double the environmental damage, much worse traffic because cars are going home by themselves with no passenger, then returning to get the passenger later.

Not really. In a future of self-driving cars most people won't even own their own car so most of these cars will be shared - essentially automated taxis. So after the car drops you off it will go to its next call or park somewhere until someone calls it.

I think that will be the case for most families second car, but not their primary. People will own one family car, that's feels comfortable and contains personal items. The second car (today used largely for commuting) will be self-driving.
Post reply on HN