California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment • Hacker News Board

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#871

Post by Dylan16807 » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 6:22 AM UTC

ajross wrote: post #843

Dylan16807 wrote: post #796

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can it detect stationary obstacles at freeway speeds? Do we have good evidence? Because autopilot couldn't.

Meh, we've been here before. That's a vague and impossible point to argue. I mean, sure, yes it does. Does it for all possible obstacles? Probably not? I certainly haven't tested. This kind of "$SYSTEM must have feature $X which is possessed by $COMPETITOR or else it will fail" is just plain bad analysis. It's possible for a Tesla to (1) be a better driver than you on the whole while still (2) doing weird stuff that…

> to "prove" the logical construct you've created

You're making guesses about my standards that aren't warranted at all. They absolutely can be met.

First off I'm specifically worried about large objects, a meter or larger.

And let's see, autopilot has done 3 billion miles? Okay, if FSD can manage 1 billion miles of freeway driving with zero or one crashes into large objects, then I'll be convinced they're solving the problem.

That should be fair, right?

> But in the real world they obviously are.

Obvious according to what?

Autopilot wasn't, because it managed to hit entire vehicles repeatedly. There is (or was) a specific warning in the manual that it might hit stationary vehicles when going over 50mph.

What makes it obvious that FSD avoids this specific problem?

> But you and everyone else will swear up and down that you'd never drive over a shed tire or whatever, even though evidence says you totally would.

You made this up about me from nowhere. Please never do that to anyone.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#872

Post by planb » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 6:26 AM UTC

mariusmg wrote: post #181

yegle wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The AV braked aggressively before impact and because it detected a collision, it attempted to pull over to avoid further safety issues," Cruise added. "When the AV tried to pull over, it continued before coming to a final stop, pulling the pedestrian forward. Our thoughts continue to be with the victim as we hope for a rapid and complete recovery." This looks like Cruise's fault, dragging a pedestrian while pullin…

>This looks like Cruise's fault Imagine having to write the code that "detects" if a pedestrain is caught underneath the car

Code that identifies if anything is stuck under the car would be useful for a lot of cases but especially if an accident already has happended.

Besides that, hard edge cases will always exist and can only be solved by a human (or an AGI?) in the loop. But they are't too common, so just detecting that the situation is not solvable by the algorithm, doing nothing and waiting for a remote operator should scale well enough.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#873

Post by alooPotato » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 6:29 AM UTC

askvictor wrote: post #867

alooPotato wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To have the city planning work correctly you kind of need participation from the cars. I.e. if the traffic light infra structure knew the destination of every car it could do things more globally optimal. So in that sense, driverless cars will actually help because of kind of nuanced reason. My guess is that there will only be a small number of driverless car companies (tesla, waymo, cruise, apple, etc) and it'll be…

> To have the city planning work correctly you kind of need participation from the cars Perhaps for the optimum solution, but you can get a _lot_ better (than things are at the moment) without that. There are plenty of cities that use sensors and cameras to adjust traffic light timing throughout the day, and have done for some time (In the 90s I studied the system used in Sydney, which had already been in existence f…

You're right the sensors help a lot too - but if a city doesn't have them then thats physical infra that needs to be bought and installed. Unfortunately, this isn't that easy any more in the US at least.

Maps/Waze data is a good point and I saw an article recently that Google is providing anonymized data to cities to help them optimize their traffic lights.

The one thing the driverless cars get you is the ability to traffic shape. You could imagine cities granting permits to waymo/cruise/etc only if they support dynamic pricing (or dynamic taxes, whatever) and dynamic routing to help distribute vehicles more evenly in space and time.

On the public transit thing... mainly because shared driverless EVs are basically a form of mass transit and I think a really good one. You can see some of my other comments on why...

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#874

Post by Rapzid » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 6:31 AM UTC

tempsy wrote: post #50

kelnos wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"Video from Cruise reviewed by the Chronicle showed the woman was in the middle of the crosswalk and that both the Cruise taxi and the other car had a green light. The Cruise applied its brakes and attempted to “minimize the impact,” a spokesperson said, but it was unable to avoid rolling over the victim." So a pedestrian was crossing a crosswalk when they didn't have the green light. It doesn't really make sense why…

Your quote states the Cruise vehicle did slow down.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#875

Post by Rapzid » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 6:42 AM UTC

kiririn wrote: post #412

tempsy wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A dark colored Nissan Sentra was stopped in the adjacent lane to the left of the AV. When the light turned green, the Nissan Sentra and the AV entered the intersection. Against a red light, a pedestrian entered the crosswalk on the opposite side of Market Street across from the vehicles, passed completely through the AV’s lane of travel, then stopped mid-crosswalk in front of the Nissan Sentra. The Nissan Sentra the…

> (illegally) Jaywalking laws never cease to trigger culture shock for me Crossing on a red signal (when safe) is even polite in my country, to not unnecessarily impede traffic

That's like the only time in Texas a pedestrian doesn't have the right of way in a marked or de-facto crosswalk; if there is a cross signal and it's red.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#876

Post by morelisp » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 7:03 AM UTC

superfrank wrote: post #833

fhub wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current ride pricing feels about 10-20% less than an Uber in SF - but I haven't really checked properly. So don't expect the rideshare product (Waymo One) to be a super cheap option.

Don't forget no pressure to tip your Waymo

There will be. "Donate $1 to Waymo's autonomous safety research fund?"

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#877

Post by lynx23 » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 7:10 AM UTC

prmoustache wrote: post #854

tim333 wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though Waymo et al aren't really competing with unusually good drivers, more with average drivers and they are probably safer there, on the roads they have been trained for. (one study - 100% reduction in the frequency of bodily injury claims and a 76% decrease in property damage - https://www.ktvu.com/news/waymo-says-its-driverless-cars-saf... )

The thing is most drivers should not be allowed to drive given their low training, driving standard, general lack of empathy and/or medications or substance abuse issues but society incorrectly assume driving is a right while it should be considered a privilege you earn and that can be revoked anytime based on regular tests + eventual tickets. I estimate at around 20% the amount of drivers that really should be allow…

Ahem... "lack of empathy", how do you plan to quantify/measure that.

Also, I was under the impression that in most countries on this planet, the priviledge of being allowed to drive a car is handed out with the drivers licence, which in most countries, you actually have to have training and a test for. I also thought it was normal practice that these licenses also get revoked, based on tickets...

The only gripe I have with the system is that elderly are not automatically subjected to a regular test of their mental faculties and remaining sight. I am getting sick of 90 year old grandmas killing 3 year olds "by accident".

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#878

Post by prmoustache » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 7:35 AM UTC

lynx23 wrote: post #877

prmoustache wrote: post #854

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is most drivers should not be allowed to drive given their low training, driving standard, general lack of empathy and/or medications or substance abuse issues but society incorrectly assume driving is a right while it should be considered a privilege you earn and that can be revoked anytime based on regular tests + eventual tickets. I estimate at around 20% the amount of drivers that really should be allow…

Ahem... "lack of empathy", how do you plan to quantify/measure that. Also, I was under the impression that in most countries on this planet, the priviledge of being allowed to drive a car is handed out with the drivers licence, which in most countries, you actually have to have training and a test for. I also thought it was normal practice that these licenses also get revoked, based on tickets... The only gripe I hav…

> Ahem... "lack of empathy", how do you plan to quantify/measure that.

That is a tricky one.

> Also, I was under the impression that in most countries on this planet, the priviledge of being allowed to drive a car is handed out with the drivers licence, which in most countries, you actually have to have training and a test for.

Training which varies a lot depending on the country. I did a lot of hours + 3000kms under supervision of my father + dedicated classes with emergency from 90kph to 0 braking on varying surfaces, including having 2 wheels on gravel and 2 wheels on pavement to be able to handle situations where the car would naturally go sideways. My Mexican partner in comparison took a handful of classes using an automatic car and only passed the test using a simulator and there you go she had her license.

> I also thought it was normal practice that these licenses also get revoked, based on tickets...

It needs an absurd amount of them for it to happen and we should still require periodic tests and knowledge refresh of the rules of the road.

> I am getting sick of 90 year old grandmas killing 3 year olds "by accident".

I am pretty sure they represent a marginal fraction of the accidents/killing compared to distracted drivers.

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#879

Post by alfla » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 7:41 AM UTC

pbarnes_1 wrote: post #515

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…

I saw a Waymo come to a screeching halt in a split second as a... less than intelligent individual... skateboarded in front of a bus, into the extremely busy road . If it was a human that person would have been dead, no question. Sometimes I'm riding in a Waymo (which I do every single day, 4x) and it does something, and I double take. Then a second later I see whatever it was it reacted to, and I'm like "dang, why d…

s/overload/overlord

Re: California suspends Cruise's autonomous vehicle deployment

#880

Post by hnbad » Wed, Oct 25, 2023, 7:43 AM UTC

paganel wrote: post #516

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…

Based on this recent-ish YT [1] video Waymo is also crap, just as Cruise is, as any car that stops at a green light, on the left-lane, is a danger to all the other drivers it shares the road with. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Rxvl3INKSg

There's a lot of legitimate criticism in that short video but the presenter is also extremely dishonest and biased. E.g. they end the video saying that they started with "a lot of optimism" when at the beginning of the ride they literally said that they expected the car to be unsafe. They also seem to mock the AI for obeying traffic laws like speed limits and stop signs, which is a bad start for a video like this.

Someone in the comments also mentions that the destination was in a dead end street, which may be the reason the drop-off is a 5 minute walk away. The 5 minute walk was also apparently indicated when she entered the destination. This along with the pick-up location being on the other side of the road feels like it might be the result of the AI being overly cautious. I'd find that acceptable for an "autonomous car" but not one advertised as a replacement for taxis (which as the presenter mentions are also used as accessibility aids where a 5 minute walk uphill can be unacceptable).

There's no footage of the car stopping at the green light, just her saying it's come to a full stop and then an external shot where it's already stopped. That's not enough information to call the stop "unsafe", even if it was impeding traffic. It also stopped with flashing hazards, assuming Waymo doesn't flash hazards during the entire ride (which I hope they don't). It's not clear why it stopped there but based on the little footage we have it doesn't seem very abrupt so any traffic behind it would have had plenty of time to notice and react the decelerating car in front of them.

The stop seems unnecessary and because it's AI and Waymo didn't provide additional information, it's impossible to say what caused it. The message she saw also indicates it was caused by an error, presumably a navigation issue. Although it is impossible to tell based on the editing, the issue seems to have been resolved within a few seconds. A human driver would have probably decided to just follow the direction of traffic for that amount of time, or change lines to come to a full stop at the side of the road but in an urban environment (not at highway speeds) the behavior is not completely unreasonable. What's more concerning to me is that the AI ran into a problem while in traffic that required the car to come to a complete halt and presumably wait for external (human?) intervention, green light or none.

I'd prefer a car that slowly comes to a full stop at a green light because of a software issue over one that keeps dragging a pedestrian it ran over for several seconds to avoid impeding traffic but the bigger issue with Waymo here is that the car runs into a software issue at all while in traffic.