I don't understand how there isn't a non-ML based piece of code that looks at moving radar and lidar returns and preforms an emergency brake, light flash, horn, or dodge if that vector would intersect with any confidence. Even slowing down to 20MPH can turn a fatal accident into an injury.
Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
91–100 of 244 posts
Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
With one data point, you can't extrapolate much. This is misuse of statistics. Consider if there was a new lottery and you weren't sure what the odds of winning were. You play it three weeks in a row and the third time you win a million dollars. Conveniently, no one else tries the new lottery yet. Does it follow then that the odds of winning a million dollars are 1 in 3? Or should you play it a few more times before…
They did not sample three times and win once. They sampled three million times and won once. Hardly "one data point."
That is one datapoint - one death.
Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Driverless car programs should really not be having more than 1 fatality per 100 million miles. Uber is currently at 1 per 3 million miles.
A sample size of 1 is completely meaningless.
Why do you say it's a sample size of 1? They've been driving AVs for a while.
Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#94"Uber announced that it had driven 2 million miles by December 2017 and is probably up to around 3 million miles today. If you do the math, that means that Uber's cars have killed people at roughly 25 times the rate of a typical human-driven car in the United States." Wow there goes that "safer than human drivers" argument.
With one data point, you can't extrapolate much. This is misuse of statistics. Consider if there was a new lottery and you weren't sure what the odds of winning were. You play it three weeks in a row and the third time you win a million dollars. Conveniently, no one else tries the new lottery yet. Does it follow then that the odds of winning a million dollars are 1 in 3? Or should you play it a few more times before…
If you do want to extrapolate from their data, it would be worth looking at the total number of accidents--not just fatalities. Insurance companies say people file an accident claim every 18 years on average. If the average miles someone drives each year is 12,000 miles, this means they get in an accident every 216,000 miles on average. If Uber drove 3 million miles, we should expect them to have been involved in about 14 accidents over those 3 million miles if the cars are on par with humans.
(I'm guestimating on some of those numbers, but the should be somewhere in the ballpark.)
Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#95Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#96"Uber announced that it had driven 2 million miles by December 2017 and is probably up to around 3 million miles today. If you do the math, that means that Uber's cars have killed people at roughly 25 times the rate of a typical human-driven car in the United States." Wow there goes that "safer than human drivers" argument.
With one data point, you can't extrapolate much. This is misuse of statistics. Consider if there was a new lottery and you weren't sure what the odds of winning were. You play it three weeks in a row and the third time you win a million dollars. Conveniently, no one else tries the new lottery yet. Does it follow then that the odds of winning a million dollars are 1 in 3? Or should you play it a few more times before…
One data point? So if Uber had driven a billion miles with zero deaths, they'd have zero data?
Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
With one data point, you can't extrapolate much. This is misuse of statistics. Consider if there was a new lottery and you weren't sure what the odds of winning were. You play it three weeks in a row and the third time you win a million dollars. Conveniently, no one else tries the new lottery yet. Does it follow then that the odds of winning a million dollars are 1 in 3? Or should you play it a few more times before…
They did not sample three times and win once. They sampled three million times and won once. Hardly "one data point."
The point remains: it isn't fair to decide what the probability is with only one data point on one side- especially for rare events.
Would it have been fair if Uber last week were to declare that they have a 0% probability of pedestrian deaths, since they'd never had one yet?
The goal of these statistics is to predict future outcomes. But with such a small data sample, you cannot fairly predict the future- just as in my lottery example.
Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Engineers aren’t in charge. Unlike lawyers, surgeons, even dental hygienists, they aren’t making the calls.
It may have been an executive that just said to turn off LIDAR for testing. Then the engineer probably mentioned it wasn't ready for live testing, was overruled, did it knowing it wasn't ready, because if he refused he may have been fired.
One of the things I was taught whilst studying engineering (in Australia) was if you, whilst acting in capacity as a professional engineer certify something knowing it is unsafe then you can be found personally liable.
Likewise if you knowingly observe anyone else in your company breaching safety/regulatory guidelines then as a professionally certified engineer you have a legal responsibility around ethical disclosure.
See: http://www.professionalengineers.org.au/rpeng/ethical-commit...
I do not know how things work in the US but in Australia these rights are protected by law. The company legally can not fire an engineer in this situation.
Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#99> We don't need redundant brakes & steering or a fancy new car; we need better software," wrote engineer Anthony Levandowski
Any engineer with this attitude needs to learn the lesson of the Therac-25. The issues in the Ars article are very similar to section 4 "Causal Factors" of the report[1].
> To get to that better software faster we should deploy the first 1000 cars asap.
Is that admitting that they do not have the "better software" and intend to deploy 1000 cars using "lesser software"? That's treading dangerously close to potential manslaughter charges if prove this willful contempt for safety to a court.
Re: Video suggests huge problems with Uber’s driverless car program
#100I have two problems with this article. 1) They make it appear that Uber is a car manufacturer. 2) Even though Uber has not been determined to be at fault, the author seems to want to make it that way anyway.
The author is making a distinction between whether Uber was legally at fault (as stated in the article, likely not) versus whether the accident was avoidable. I agree with the author's position that the accident was likely avoidable.
I think even if you think the accident was unavoidable it is certainly damning that the car never attempted to stop.