81–90 of 124 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
... as does the person whose house gets knocked down to make room for the new rail line.
Fuck them
That tester detected a serious bug in the whole concept, inadvertently risking his life during testing. He should've been promoted.
"He regained alertness once the car crashed..."
Yeah I bet he did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a prototype vehicle. Safety controls must be implemented differently than a production vehicle that has passed some yet unspecified certification process. Complaining about a prototype having different UX than a production vehicle is like complaining about a racing car having different seatbelts than a road car. Different design requirements for different usages.
I'm thinking about actual usage, not the UX.
It's a prototype vehicle, where the self driving features are experimental and not certified by a third party. Extra safety systems are necessary that might not be reasonable once the tech is polished and regulated.
That tester detected a serious bug in the whole concept, inadvertently risking his life during testing. He should've been promoted.
Agreed, but lets not get ahead of ourselves. The statement is the "Driver no longer works for waymo" not that "they were fired for the incident.". That feels somewhat deliberate choice of words to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed, but lets not get ahead of ourselves. The statement is the "Driver no longer works for waymo" not that "they were fired for the incident.". That feels somewhat deliberate choice of words to me.
clearly picked up by a competing firm for presumably a large salary increase
Even if he did respond, there's still the problem of whether he can respond in time. Driving normally requires sub-second reaction times.
The basic idea is that the switch can only be maintained in a non-braking state by an alert, not-incapacitated person. If you press too hard, it brakes; if you don't press hard enough, it brakes. You have to apply just enough force, and that's something only an alert person can do.
Clearly, using the gas pedal to turn off auto-pilot is not good enough.
By the way, we now have a pilot program in Hong Kong where cameras are installed in buses and use computer vision to detect if a bus driver is dozing off. The system then automatically makes the driver's seat vibrate and sound an alarm to wake the driver up.
Google should have a camera pointing at the driver and use machine learning to detect someone that is asleep or medically impaired and automatically take over if the car starts to leave its lane.
Perhaps the driver could configure where it wants the car to go in such a case (if asleep: continue to final destination; if medical issue: drive to nearest hospital and call "Parent" or "Spouse" on cell phone and explain the situation; if smart watch can detect alcohol in your sweat therefore unconsciousness likely due to intoxication: drive to a trusted friend and call ahead, etc.).
At the very least, if the person appears to be asleep it could ask "Are you sure you want to return to manual control?". It should be able to tell the difference between someone sleeping and someone alert wanting control back.
It's been some decades since fiction inspired us, but we're getting close!