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

Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 245 posts

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#111

Post by rgbrenner »

spaceribs wrote: post #85
hunter23 wrote: post #63

This is how I would deal with it if I was a regulator: * Revoke Uber's license to operate - While they might not be found at fault, they have shown gross negligence by having an operator that doesn't observe the road, computer vision that can't sense a pedestrian crossing several lanes even when their LIDAR manufacturer says they could, and an algorithm which encouraged the car to speed 3 mph over the limit when it w…

This sounds expensive, unnecessary and would result in creating systems that were built to defeat a test, not reality. Most current human drivers wouldn't be able to pass a test with the conditions that resulted in the fatal crash.

Most humans can't do large square roots in their head either. I still expect my calculator to do it properly. What's the point of adding lidar to cars if they aren't going to use it?

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#112

Post by spaceribs »

notahacker wrote: post #95
spaceribs wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds expensive, unnecessary and would result in creating systems that were built to defeat a test, not reality. Most current human drivers wouldn't be able to pass a test with the conditions that resulted in the fatal crash.

I also think most current human drivers would also expect to spend significant time in jail for causing death by driving so careless they didn't even try to brake when confronted by an pedestrian in the roadway (even if she shouldn't have been there and an accident may not have been entirely avoidable) I'm fine with Uber's executives and programmers accepting the same level of culpability as an alternative to meeting…

Tests allow irresponsible people to blame the test when their system fails, I worry that a system like that will cause the opposite of your intentions.

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#113

Post by TillE »

UncleEntity wrote: post #75
ehsankia wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, in terms of "conditions", it doesn't really get much better than Arizona. That's why most cars drive there. By most metrics, it's actually easier there than in California.

Well, except for the other drivers on the road. Horribly horrible drivers here.

It's a cliche that everyone thinks this about their own particular area, but it's true that people in different areas (sometimes within the same state) drive badly in very different ways. Just another factor that SDVs will have to test.

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#114

Post by sethev »

bertjk wrote: post #76
hunter23 wrote: post #63

This is how I would deal with it if I was a regulator: * Revoke Uber's license to operate - While they might not be found at fault, they have shown gross negligence by having an operator that doesn't observe the road, computer vision that can't sense a pedestrian crossing several lanes even when their LIDAR manufacturer says they could, and an algorithm which encouraged the car to speed 3 mph over the limit when it w…

The article mentions that the car was going "40 miles an hour in a 45-mile-an-hour zone." Is there a more reliable source stating that the car was speeding?

Seems an odd question. Do have some reason to think it was speeding?

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#115

Post by flogic »

simmanian wrote: post #96
spaceribs wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds expensive, unnecessary and would result in creating systems that were built to defeat a test, not reality. Most current human drivers wouldn't be able to pass a test with the conditions that resulted in the fatal crash.

This is simply not true. The dashcam footage released by Tempe police does not depict the driving conditions at the site of the accident accurately at all. Check out [1] for the actual driving conditions at night. I'm not usually the one to talk about conspiracy, but Tempe police had no legal responsibility to release the footage since the investigation is still ongoing. Couple this with the statement released by the…

The thing is that it doesn't really matter. There are only 2 options here. Either, the car should have seen the woman and taken corrective action or it was driving faster than it can see. Just because the speed limit says X doesn't mean that's the speed you should be going. Often, actual conditions require driving slower.

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#116

Post by danso »

sethev wrote: post #114
bertjk wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article mentions that the car was going "40 miles an hour in a 45-mile-an-hour zone." Is there a more reliable source stating that the car was speeding?

Seems an odd question. Do have some reason to think it was speeding?

Early reports said the police stated the AV was going 38 in a 35mph zone

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#117

Post by bhauer »

sethev wrote: post #114
bertjk wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article mentions that the car was going "40 miles an hour in a 45-mile-an-hour zone." Is there a more reliable source stating that the car was speeding?

Seems an odd question. Do have some reason to think it was speeding?

The grandparent comment implied it was speeding:

> and an algorithm which encouraged the car to speed 3 mph over the limit when it was dark conditions

But the linked NYT article said 40 in a 45 zone.

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#118

Post by spaceribs »

rgbrenner wrote: post #109
spaceribs wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I do feel like I've been had after that and a few other videos, so thank you for that. My point though, is that I don't want self driving cars to defeat simulations or tests, I want self driving cars that can react to real driving conditions.

But how else do you imagine scenarios like these are tested? Normally there aren't a lot of people willing to jump randomly out in front of cars to test their reaction.

I really don't know. Even with all the hours of recorded road time by Google/Uber used as a testbed for proper driving conditions, most machine learning systems still suffer from figuring out ways of cheating[1], and in those cases it could be fatal.

[1] "The program even learns how to take advantage of bugs and glitches, like timing jumps so that Mario begins falling again at the exact time that he makes contact with a Goomba. Mario's invincible when he's falling, so the touch kills the Goomba, not Mario, and it gives him a further jump boost." http://www.wired.co.uk/article/super-mario-solved

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#119

Post by maym86 »

galieos_ghost wrote: post #102
maym86 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber's competitive advantage has always been its willingness to engage in unethical behavior. No surprise here. They were forced out if California because their system didn't work so they just put it on roads in Arizona instead and killed someone. Edit: grammar

They weren't forced out, they just didn't want to comply because they would have to report incidents which would show how far behind competitors they are, which would kill their valuation

It's a semantic difference and exactly my point. They were effectively forced out of California because their technology doesn't work.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/video/2016/dec/15/ube...

Re: Uber’s Self-Driving Cars Were Struggling Before Arizona Crash

#120

Post by exhaze »

chrsstrm wrote: post #103
hunter23 wrote: post #63

This is how I would deal with it if I was a regulator: * Revoke Uber's license to operate - While they might not be found at fault, they have shown gross negligence by having an operator that doesn't observe the road, computer vision that can't sense a pedestrian crossing several lanes even when their LIDAR manufacturer says they could, and an algorithm which encouraged the car to speed 3 mph over the limit when it w…

When does the next batch of YC applications open up? I'd like to introduce TestTrack - Autonomous vehicle certification as a service. State (and federal) governments collaborate with us to develop a certification plan that AV makers must pass before being allowed to operate in their state. With a plan in hand, AV makers and state reps meet at one of our regional test tracks to implement the custom tests. Obstacle avo…

S18 batch applications are already open:

https://www.ycombinator.com/apply/

Post reply on HN