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

51–60 of 1001 posts

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#51

Post by dragonwriter »

kelnos wrote: post #13
s1mon wrote: post #10

According to Cruise's X(Twitter) account [0], the suspension seems to be related to an incident in which a human driver hit-and-run propelled a pedestrian in front of a Cruise AV and the Cruise vehicle couldn't avoid hitting the person. When that incident was first reported [1], it seemed like a situation where if it was a human driver in the Cruise vehicle, they wouldn't be found to be at any fault. However given th…

The article you link to says there was more to it! The Cruise vehicle, after running over the woman, stopped on top of her with the rear axle/tires pinning her to the ground, trapping her there. And it just... sat there. I hesitate to believe that a human driver would do something like that. You could, however, argue that staying in place was the right thing to do; continuing to drive to get the woman out from under…

The DMV press release specifically cites safety-related misrepresentation as part of the basis for the suspension.

It may not be the performance of the vehicle in the incident that led to the suspensions so much as Cruise's performance in the investigation of the incident (or information about Cruise's prior behavior on safety info that came to light through the investigation.)

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#52

Post by manquer »

iamtheworstdev wrote: post #25
keneda7 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not seen any easy way to get a tesla to drive without anyone in it. Any chance you could provide a link showing this?

not sure if you're trolling or not but last i heard people simply strapping an exercise/weighted wrist band to the steering wheel which simulated torque being applied to the steering wheel which leads a Tesla to believe someone is paying attention. A quick search on Youtube reveals more than a few videos confirming this.

You still need to be in the car and in the driving seat ? Unlike cruize which does not require anyone in the car

Which would make the driver responsible not the the company for incidents especially ones which explicitly circumvented controls.

The scenario with cruize is different because the company is responsible for everything

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#53

Post by sorokod »

DeIlliad wrote: post #17
starbase wrote: post #2

Is there evidence that Cruise is more dangerous than a human driver?

I do not believe "it's as dangerous as a human driver" is a good reason to look past all the problems with self-driving cars. There should be a higher standard than that.

Let's not forget that the companies that develop and lobby for self driving cars do it for profit. Whatever safety qualities they may or may not have are there to deliver and maximize profit. At this point in time.

Public transport is a safer alternative but not as profitable

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#54

Post by colordrops »

jaylittle wrote: post #12
colordrops wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand why so many people hate Tesla, but they aren't allowed to drive fully automated without a human monitoring them, so not the same situation.

If by "not allowed" you actually mean, "implements safety protocols so easy to circumvent that they may as well not exist", then I agree. Otherwise... not so much.

Be honest though, no one is doing this. At most some hacker messing around, but it's not at scale at all like the other companies. And even then, that's the fault of the driver, not Tesla.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#55

Post by dragonwriter »

alphabetting wrote: post #41
ProfessorLayton wrote: post #34

As a pedestrian I'm not a fan of being an unwitting part of a private company's beta testing. Before this devolves into whatboutism vs the safety of human drivers, my opposition is to adding yet another unknown safety layer to walking down the street. Usually when private companies are developing products that could kill, drugs for example, it is on the company to exhaustively prove the safety and effectiveness befor…

The whole point of AVs is that they are a safety layer.

No, the whole point of AVs, like any other product of a for-profit business, is that they make the manufacturers money.

A part of the sales pitch for AVs is that autonomy acts as a safety layer.

As with any sales pitch, the interest of the manufacturer is often more in getting people to believe the pitch than in it being true, validating that it is true is a concern of outside parties. Insofar as AV adoption requires loosening existing rules to allow them, that includes regulatory authorities.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#56

Post by alphabetting »

bobthepanda wrote: post #47
alphabetting wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of AVs is that they are a safety layer.

They are theoretically a safety layer when we have proven they work. If they do not work well, then they aren't actually safer.

I haven't seen anything that indicates they don't work well. My anecdotal experience is feeling much safer inside and around them in comparison to vehicles with humans behind the wheel.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#57

Post by pests »

iamtheworstdev wrote: post #25
keneda7 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not seen any easy way to get a tesla to drive without anyone in it. Any chance you could provide a link showing this?

not sure if you're trolling or not but last i heard people simply strapping an exercise/weighted wrist band to the steering wheel which simulated torque being applied to the steering wheel which leads a Tesla to believe someone is paying attention. A quick search on Youtube reveals more than a few videos confirming this.

Autopilot is different than the Full Self Driving (FSD) Beta.

The FSD Beta uses the in-cabin camera's to do eye tracking and all the other attention stuff.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#58

Post by paxys »

throwaway5959 wrote: post #5

And yet TSLA is allowed to have “Full Self Driving” on the road in hundreds of thousands of cars as a “beta”.

The people behind the wheel of the Tesla are taking full responsibility for the car's actions, whether they know it or not. No such driver exists in Cruise's case.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#59

Post by keneda7 »

iamtheworstdev wrote: post #25
keneda7 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not seen any easy way to get a tesla to drive without anyone in it. Any chance you could provide a link showing this?

not sure if you're trolling or not but last i heard people simply strapping an exercise/weighted wrist band to the steering wheel which simulated torque being applied to the steering wheel which leads a Tesla to believe someone is paying attention. A quick search on Youtube reveals more than a few videos confirming this.

No I was being serious. Searching turns up defeating the system with someone in the seat but not without. The other commenter provided a video showing it is possible from two month ago.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#60

Post by endtime »

wolverine876 wrote: post #21
starbase wrote: post #2

Is there evidence that Cruise is more dangerous than a human driver?

That is a standard that the self-driving industry likes to promulgate, I'm guessing because it's rhetorically powerful and because it suits them. is it accepted as a standard by any professionals? Why or why not?

I'm not in the industry, though I did briefly work on a self-driving car in grad school back in 2009.

One simple and obvious reason for this standard is that it optimizes for human safety.

Post reply on HN