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

California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#461

Post by oatmeal1 »

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #363
dkarl wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it ironic that the human driver is still at large Ironic but completely expected. We have normalized and accepted the awfulness of human drivers to a degree that people just don't comprehend. Human would be terrible drivers even if you ignored the fact that many of them are chemically impaired, even if you ignored the fact that they are prone to rage and aggression. As we consider the safety of self-driving…

The problem is that you can't punish a car. If a human being had done that they would have absolutely had the book thrown at them. There was a case where a woman was drunk driving and hit a man, he came up over the hood and into her windshield. He was alive but bleeding. She drove home and parked her car in the garage. He bled out through the night. NO ONE was sympathetic towards that woman. But if an automated vehic…

> The problem is that you can't punish a car.

You can punish the manufacturer of any item that creates an excessive danger to the public.

Lawn darts aren't intended to be thrown near people, and don't exist anymore because people used them negligently. Human-driven cars are used negligently and kill 40,000 Americans a year.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#462

Post by jiveturkey42 »

paxys wrote: post #221
jiveturkey42 wrote: post #100

They will continue to roll out in business-friendly less-regulated states

Great, let the people who voted to be guinea pigs be guinea pigs and leave the rest of us alone.

Innovation is seldom compatible with risk aversion. Some folks enjoy the risk

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#463

Post by beau_g »

hardcopy wrote: post #129
wstrange wrote: post #71

Link to Cruise review of incident: https://getcruise.com/news/blog/2023/a-detailed-review-of-th...

> The AV detected a collision, bringing the vehicle to a stop; then attempted to pull over to avoid causing further road safety issues, pulling the individual forward approximately 20 feet. Jesus Christ! Good riddance, I'm glad their permits are revoked. Can you imagine witnessing this and watching an autonomous vehicle slowly crushing and dragging someone underneath? That 20 ft must have felt like forever to witness…

If you think that's bad, just wait until you hear about some of the stuff human drivers do

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#464

Post by jimnotgym »

gcampos wrote: post #320
fhub wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my perspective, as a relatively early adopter of Waymo (60+ rides). I have zero gripes with the driving itself. In fact I've seen Waymos do things that no human would be able to do*. Drop-offs and pickups I'd like to see improvements made like getting a bit closer to the curb. Occasionally the route selections make no sense at all. * Waymo made a right turn up a steep hill. Two lanes each way. It then pulled a b…

That is actually an interesting question. We track how many accidents the automated cars cause, but I'm not sure how many accidents they prevent are tracked.

They should let an accident happen occasionally, and then show how it had the data to avoid it if humans had just trusted them.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#465

Post by starlevel003 »

petemir wrote: post #430
paxys wrote: post #310

I had an epiphany about self driving recently late at night on the streets of San Francisco. It was a somewhat deserted part of town, and the roads were empty. There was a lone Cruise car chugging along and constantly stopping at red lights. The signals were so badly optimized that the car would be the only one waiting at a completely empty intersection for minutes at a time, only to be stopped again at the next one,…

I always envisioned a kind of world peace where all car manufacturers got together and in a not-designed-by-committee way developed a mesh protocol where vehicles and “the city” (i.e. traffic lights, railway crossing and so on) could communicate data to each other in order to ease some of the limitations of current autonomous driving technology.

Perhaps we could optimise it further, by having sets of steel paths for the cars to drive on too.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#466

Post by [deleted] »

paxys wrote: post #310

I had an epiphany about self driving recently late at night on the streets of San Francisco. It was a somewhat deserted part of town, and the roads were empty. There was a lone Cruise car chugging along and constantly stopping at red lights. The signals were so badly optimized that the car would be the only one waiting at a completely empty intersection for minutes at a time, only to be stopped again at the next one,…

[deleted]

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#467

Post by lokar »

pj_mukh wrote: post #160
mips_avatar wrote: post #96

The incident last month where that woman got dragged and pinned by the Cruise vehicle was pretty disconcerting. The initial collision wasn't the fault of the cruise vehicle (another vehicle hit her pushing her into the cruise vehicle and fled the scene), but the cruise vehicle then proceeded to try to "pull over" and just dragged this woman and rolled over her leg. Weird situation but definitely something made much m…

Did Cruise release the video, its not clear to me a human driver would be better (other than some textual descriptions of the event)? The (human) person who actually caused the crash is still at large, and the bay area (SF + Oakland) still continues to one of the municipalities with negligble traffic enforcement [1] and massively dangerous (human) driving behavior [2]. So the city and DMV focussing their efforts on t…

They lied to the DMV, that alone is enough to ban them.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#468

Post by FireBeyond »

marcosdumay wrote: post #260
mumblemumble wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear to me that this is purely a software problem; it might be a "the car doesn't even have the sensors necessary to detect this kind of situation" problem. It could also be a "the software can't anticipate that this would be happening the way a human can because it doesn't have object permanence" problem. That's probably at least part of how a human would do it. But I have a suspicion that we're very, very…

I would be surprised if it turns out that those self-driving cars don't have object permanence. Making things move around without a physical model looks like a really nasty infinite bug-breeder.

For the longest time, at least the visual representation of trains at a level crossing strongly implied challenges around object permanence for Tesla.

I will say that I recognize that the visual representation may not be a 1:1 (in fact quite certainly isn't) mapping of the computer's "world view".

But it was quite ridiculous and definitely disconcerting seeing a level crossing with a train going through it and seeing the Tesla I was in acting like there was a traffic light that was erratically going red, while dozens of semi trucks flickered in and out of existence across the screen in front of me.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#469

Post by chriscjcj »

pie420 wrote: post #380
seagullriffic wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a poor use of numbers to prove a point. Any unsafe car - one - could potentially end multiple lives. Therefore, one unsafe car is unacceptable. Look up "Vision Zero". It's possible, and should be expected from our town planners, vehicle manufacturers, and drivers.

Vision Zero is literally the least effective program out there. Almost every metric they track has gotten worse in the past 5 years

I think "zero" refers to the amount of enforcement SF is willing to commit to. I commute to SF daily; I can't remember the last time I saw someone being given a ticket for a moving violation. Maybe it happens in places I don't go, but I've literally not seen it occur in the last 20 years. (Parking tickets, sure, but that's about it.) Our politicians love to pass laws and feel proud of themselves for doing so. But from where I'm sitting, I see a lot of people not caring and doing whatever they want with zero consequences.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#470

Post by cp9 »

jbdoug wrote: post #456
akira2501 wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people can travel by foot, bike, scooter, bus, train, trolley, etc... to get their daily errands done. In the Top 10 US cities that have the density to support this, sure. Head out to the Top 100s and this reality falls apart very quickly. There's no economic incentive for businesses to be so well distributed through a dense urban core. There's differential zoning and mixed use that form the backbone of those…

Well we spend the last 60 years reengineering all our cities to be car-centric, so who's to say we can't undo that? Most of the top 100 US cities existed before cars, we just hollowed out all the urban cores in service of having ample street parking. I currently live in Ann Arbor, MI (the 244th largest city in the US) without a car. If they built a Trader Joes downtown I would have 0 issues being car free. The city h…

> I currently live in Ann Arbor, MI (the 244th largest city in the US) without a car. If they built a Trader Joes downtown I would have 0 issues being car free.

I live in a very very very similarly sized city in OH and I feel exactly the same way (down to the trader joes even). I do have a car and I often wish I didn't need it. My city is small enough that not only is a 15 minute city a feasible option, it could be a reality today with a couple small infrastructure changes.

Post reply on HN