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

Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

static.googleusercontent.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 83 posts

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#61

Post by roel_v »

icebraining wrote: post #50
roel_v wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this information can be derived from a dashcam, and they're ubiquitous today. And yes, in 10 years time there will be no such notion as 'private travel'. Between your phone's GSM/CDMA, bluetooth and wifi signals and dashcams, security and traffic cameras, there will be dozens of parties who monitor every move any person makes outside of their home in urban or suburban areas (be it by car, foot or bike). With d…

All of this information can be derived from a dashcam, and they're ubiquitous today. They are? Where? According to the SF Chronicle, "hardly anyone in the U.S. uses dash cams except police and commercial truck and taxi drivers." Here in Europe, many countries don't even allow them (we have a different concept of "expectation of privacy" around here).

'Here' = in Europe. It's only illegal in Austria.

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#62

Post by roel_v »

kriro wrote: post #49
roel_v wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this information can be derived from a dashcam, and they're ubiquitous today. And yes, in 10 years time there will be no such notion as 'private travel'. Between your phone's GSM/CDMA, bluetooth and wifi signals and dashcams, security and traffic cameras, there will be dozens of parties who monitor every move any person makes outside of their home in urban or suburban areas (be it by car, foot or bike). With d…

Dashcams are illegal in Germany due to data privacy laws. Pretty much the excact scenario a Google car would face.

No they're not. They've been denied as evidence a few times in court, and you can't publish images/video with recognizable people on them, but that's not a problem if all you want to do is monitor/track people.

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#63

Post by dannypgh »

jakeogh wrote: post #24
DannoHung wrote: post #19

Have any of the AV teams said anything about testing in hazardous road conditions yet? Driving rain, thick fog, heavy snow, sleet, the like. Maybe the answer they'll give is, "Don't drive you dummy", but that's not really an acceptable solution for most people.

Isn't it interesting that people who relinquish their mobility to a computer will loose their driving skills? Maps nicely to other things.

I think it's more interesting that people who relinquish their mobility to cars end up thinking that cars are the only potential source of mobility, forgetting that walking, mass transit, and bicycling are all viable means of transport for most people.

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#64

Post by amelius »

CardenB wrote: post #60
amelius wrote: post #31

What I wonder most about: whenever the Car gets a minor software update, will they (be required to) do again 10,000 hours of test-driving?

You can use recorded data in a simulated environment to test new software in an accelerated manner.

The problem is: the car interacts with its environment. When a new algorithm kicks in, the car will behave differently, and as a result the input data will be different, and thus the recorded data will have lost its relevance.

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#65

Post by icebraining »

roel_v wrote: post #61
icebraining wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of this information can be derived from a dashcam, and they're ubiquitous today. They are? Where? According to the SF Chronicle, "hardly anyone in the U.S. uses dash cams except police and commercial truck and taxi drivers." Here in Europe, many countries don't even allow them (we have a different concept of "expectation of privacy" around here).

'Here' = in Europe. It's only illegal in Austria.

Where in Europe? They certainly aren't here in Portugal nor in Spain, and I don't remember seeing them in Belgium, which I've visited recently.

As for the legality, I wouldn't be so sure. Owning them is certainly legal, but filming the public street indiscriminately is usually considered against the Data Protection Directive, and I don't see why would dashcams be excluded.

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#67

Post by kriro »

roel_v wrote: post #62
kriro wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dashcams are illegal in Germany due to data privacy laws. Pretty much the excact scenario a Google car would face.

No they're not. They've been denied as evidence a few times in court, and you can't publish images/video with recognizable people on them, but that's not a problem if all you want to do is monitor/track people.

I stand corrected. Seems to be legal as long as you don't violate standard data privacy laws.

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#68

Post by saturdaysaint »

I found the linked Vox article really interesting -http://www.vox.com/2015/6/1/8700459/google-self-driving-cars

I've read reports that make me dread being behind a AV at a 4-way stop or a blinking red light - one passenger described waiting at a light for several minutes while drivers honked angrily behind them. Maybe AV's will encourage traffic planners to implement more roundabouts, which might be less prone to other driver's taking advantage. Or maybe AVs just need to get better at estimating the speed of oncoming traffic.

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#69

Post by roel_v »

icebraining wrote: post #65
roel_v wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Here' = in Europe. It's only illegal in Austria.

Where in Europe? They certainly aren't here in Portugal nor in Spain, and I don't remember seeing them in Belgium, which I've visited recently. As for the legality, I wouldn't be so sure. Owning them is certainly legal, but filming the public street indiscriminately is usually considered against the Data Protection Directive, and I don't see why would dashcams be excluded.

Across Europe. OK I guess 'ubiquitous' might be an overstatement, but I regularly see cars with dash cams in Belgium, The Netherlands, France and Germany, which is where I have driven the last few years. I can't find any Europe-wide actual sales data, but I don't see why there would be huge differences in other countries. Also, they're readily on sale in e.g. Spain, Portugal and Hungary (just 3 countries I checked). Which of course doesn't necessarily mean that they're being bought en mass, but which does give an indication.

Re: Google Self-Driving Car Project Monthly Report [pdf]

#70

Post by agumonkey »

jessriedel wrote: post #33
Swizec wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consider another problem the vehicle already solves. The AV wisely yields to those running a red light, even though the AV has the right of way. If it didn't, but was instead frequently t-boned... Google could technically still say its vehicle "never caused an accident," right? It'd never be at fault for these, but the AVs are still designed to avoid them anyway. Is this inconsistent with a choice not to avoid rear…

> You as a human are supposed to avoid getting killed even in cases where you aren't legally liable. The bar is much higher than that. You are supposed to protect others, not just yourself, and including people who are at fault. If a pedestrian is jaywalking and you provably have plenty of time and ability to avoid them, but you strike and kill them, you are definitely guilty of something like manslaughter. Although…

Sometimes it really is impossible, I was involved with a case where the victim literally ran across the street, hidden by a bus stop panel. Nobody saw nobody, driver well below speed limits.
Post reply on HN