111–120 of 237 posts
I'm not complaining, but like..maybe also do this for the vast majority of human drivers who also flout these rules.
Human drivers can be seen and stopped by police and given an appropriate punishment. Self-driving cars have nobody to take accountability like that so you need to go back to the source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're going to write a lot of code in blood this way. Waymo has been doing a lot of driving, without any blood. They seems to be using a combination of (a) learning a lot from close calls like this one where no one was hurt even through it still behaved incorrectly and (b) being cautious so that even when it does something it shouldn't the risk is very low because it's moving slowly.
Waymo operates in a very limited scope and area. I would not attempt to extrapolate anything from their current performance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but the context here is a discussion about how a computer can know all of these "intuitive" rules humans follow. The answer is encoded in the map data in this case, but it's an interesting category of problems for autonomous vehicles.
Have you had the experience of riding in a Waymo making a left hand turn against incoming traffic -- and how it handles the eventual yellow light? I was very impressed about the decision making in this situation. Seems very intuitive (at least superficially).
in my estimation the robo driver has reached a median-human level of driving skill. it still doesn’t quite know how to balance the weight of the car through turns and it sometimes gets fussy with holding lanes at night but otherwise it mimics human behaviors pretty well except where they’re illegal like rolling through the first stop at a stop sign.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some places will dismiss a traffic ticket if you attend a driver's education class to get updates, though you can only do this once every few years. So at least there have been some attempts to get people to update their learning.
This only happens if you get a traffic ticket, which is rare and getting rarer. Ironically this means the people with the cleanest driving record are least likely to know the current ruleset.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The human traffic code is also written in blood. But humans are worse at applying the patch universally.
We don't even try. In the US you demonstrate that you know the rules at one point in time and that's it, as long as you never get a DUI you're good. For instance, the 2003 California Driver's Handbook[1] first introduced the concept of "bike lanes" to driver education, but contains the advice "You may park in the bike lane unless signs say “NO PARKING.”" which is now illegal. Anyone who took their test in the early 2…
That's silly. People become aware of new laws all the time without having to attend a training course or read an updated handbook.
I took the CA driver's written test for the first time in 2004 when I moved here from another state. I don't recall whether or not there was anything in the handbook about bike lanes, but I certainly found out independently when it became illegal to park in one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a strength if you catch the bug and fix it before it injures anyone. If anything, this proves edge-cases can take years to manifest.
Why accept the company's say so without any proof being offered or even a description of the fix? If it's been years and this kind of thing, described in regulations so clearly some attention was paid by engineers, still happens, then maybe fixing it isn't trivial.
There's a video of the actual incident.[1] (Yahoo posted some file photo). The Waymo was entering from a side street, in front of the school bus. It clearly recognized that it was in an iffy situation and slowed to creeping speed, rather than blocking the intersection. No children are visible. If the school bus has a dashcam, much better info may be available. This video starts too late. [1] https://www.youtube.com/w…
I dont get it. It looks like it just made a left turn in front of a stopped school bus? That's illegal? In any case it seems like tiny issue. Illegal or not it didnt do anything dangerous
Yes, if you see a school bus with its flashers on, you may not pass it. Period.
There's a video of the actual incident.[1] (Yahoo posted some file photo). The Waymo was entering from a side street, in front of the school bus. It clearly recognized that it was in an iffy situation and slowed to creeping speed, rather than blocking the intersection. No children are visible. If the school bus has a dashcam, much better info may be available. This video starts too late. [1] https://www.youtube.com/w…
I dont get it. It looks like it just made a left turn in front of a stopped school bus? That's illegal? In any case it seems like tiny issue. Illegal or not it didnt do anything dangerous
Perhaps allowing them to drive around school buses is not a good idea, although personally I have felt far safer biking or walking in front of a Waymo than a human. But rules few humans follow, like rolling stops, and allowing them to go 5 over seems like a no-brainer. We have a real opportunity here to br more sensible with road rules; let’s not mess it up by limiting robots to our human laws.
To be honest. I think this is one of the strengths of autonomous cars. With humans when they do this at max we can punish that individual. To increase population wide compliance we can do a safety awareness campaign, ramp up enforcement, ramp up the fines. But all of these cost a lot of money to do, take a while to have an effect, need to be repeated/kept up, and only help statistically. With a robot driver we can de…
> we can develop a fix and roll it out on all of them. You have to know what you're fixing first. You're going to write a lot of code in blood this way. It's not that people are particularly bad at driving it's that the road is exceptionally dynamic with many different users and use cases all trying to operate in a synchronized fashion with a dash of strong regulation sprinkled in.
In this case the expected behaviour is clearly spelled out in the law.
> You're going to write a lot of code in blood this way.
Do note that in this case nobody died or got hurt. People observed that the autonomous vehicles did not follow the rules, the company got notified of this fact and they are working on a fix. No blood was spilled to achieve this result.
Also note that we spill much blood on our roads already. And we do that without much of any hope of learning from individual accidents. When George runs over John there is no way to turn that into a lesson for all drivers. There is no way to understand what went wrong in George’s head, and then there is no way to adjust all driver’s heads so that particular problem won’t happen again.