Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program • Hacker News Board

Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program

#241

Post by CydeWeys » Sat, Mar 24, 2018, 5:17 PM UTC

sureaboutthis wrote: post #239

CydeWeys wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand your objection. If Uber's cars are killing people at a much higher rate than human drivers, then that's a huge problem. They shouldn't be allowed on the roads at all, as they'd vastly increase traffic deaths if widely used. Whether or not someone is at fault in a given accident only matters to the insurance company; that person is still dead. What is your counter-argument? That it doesn't ma…

Your first paragraph, here, doesn't matter. He is stating opinion as if it were fact and what he said (not you now) isn't fact at all. Your second paragraph emphasizes my point. You,too, are stating that Uber is a car manufacturer, in whole or in part. Does Uber manufacture any parts of this car at all? The impression the opinion piece gives is that Uber manufacturers cars.

This is a pointless semantic argument. Uber did write and is responsible for the self-diving software involved, which is what's at issue here.

Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program

#242

Post by stordoff » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 11:46 PM UTC

URSpider94 wrote: post #108

femto wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is an argument for removing this ambiguity by making self driving cars automatically liable for all personal injury, whether the person be inside or outside the car. The only exception would be if the tester could prove intent by the other party, keeping in mind that a self-driving car will have extensive logs of its environment to use in such a defence. Supporting arguments include: 1) The physics of d…

Your concept that there are no accidents, only oversights, is not correct. Say I’m crossing the street and I don’t see your car coming, because I look the wrong way or I’m distracted, or my view is blocked by the sun. You may not be able to avoid hitting me. Additionally, if we train self-driving cars to always give way to pedestrians who even look like they might cross the street, they’re going to have a heck of a t…

> Kids are going to learn that they can trigger a squealing emergency stop by lunging towards the curb - great fun!

Isn't that already the case (and arguably they'd get more satisfaction out of it in some cases by seeing an annoyed driver)? Further, I'd say that's what _should_ happen -- if someone looks like they are going to enter the road, you stop.

Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program

#243

Post by Schwolop » Mon, Mar 26, 2018, 1:19 AM UTC

colatkinson wrote: post #122

PinguTS wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is ISO26262 for automotive about safety. Yes, there are reviews, QA, and all of that. So, yes, there is no single person responsible (exceptions apply). But there is no excuse for using 3rd party libs. Just don't use it. If you not know: do not use it. That is the reason, why certifications are for. The same rules apply for medical and other areas.

> But there is no excuse for using 3rd party libs. Just don't use it. If you not know: do not use it. Wait, what? That goes against one of the core benefits of open source software--that having many eyes on a problem decreases the risk of bugs. I'm willing to bet that if Uber had to implement their own machine learning/vision libraries from the ground up, there would be significantly more issues.

In ISO13485 medical grade software (certain levels of it anyway), the same concept applies. Anything not written in house is "SOUP"; Software of Unknown Provenance. You're required to pass that through a review process before using it, and in many instances it's not worth the effort to review compared to instead just re-writing it yourself.

Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program

#244

Post by speedplane » Fri, Mar 30, 2018, 10:07 AM UTC

I was at SXSW a few weeks ago and went to an Uber driverless car talk. They spent the first half of the talk discussing driver safety, it felt incredibly hollow.

If you really cared about safety, there are far more immediate and impactful solutions then spending billions on self-driving cars. If they came out and said that they were doing it to make money or make driving easier, it would have carried more weight. But you just can't trust a word this company says.