Autonomous cars? I think not

RobertL
Posts: 730
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:08 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby RobertL » Thu Mar 22, 2018 5:19 pm

Tequestra wrote:I reckon that the best way to incorporate autonomous vehicles into the current and historical set of road rules would be to insist that a licenced driver always be behind the wheel...


But there won't be a "wheel" to sit behind in a truly autonomous vehicle. There will be no controls for a human operator to use. We will just be going along for the ride.
Image

uart
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
Location: Newcastle

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby uart » Thu Mar 22, 2018 5:43 pm

Jmuzz wrote:The video contrast and dynamic range is terrible, which is normal for a cheap dashcam.
There were street lights and headlights (which are good in this car by all reports) so real vision would be as good as it gets at night, not a big dark vortex like the video.


I agree. Look at were the person was crossing, quite close to two street lights. The human eye should have been able to detect that ped/cyclist a lot earlier than what it appears in that video. This backed up by the interior view in that video, where the illumination level in the interior of that car noticeably increases in the second just before impact.

In my opinion that car performed about the same as an extremely inattentive driver. An only slightly inattentive driver would probably have been able to slow and swerve to at least reduce the severity of the impact, and a properly attentive driver may have been able to completely avoid a collision.

Jmuzz
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Jmuzz » Thu Mar 22, 2018 6:43 pm

Someone made a video with non potato dashcam to show the real brightness of the road at night. To clear up confusion about the person coming out of invisible black hole.
https://youtu.be/CRW0q8i3u6E
34sec I think?

User avatar
Lukeyboy
Posts: 3489
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Lukeyboy » Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:05 pm

mikesbytes wrote:
Tequestra wrote:Image

The driver was asleep at the wheel. If my 94 yo Grand Mother was driving that Volvo, that poor cyclist would have walked away.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-22/s ... ed/9575624


Enough time/distance to swerve


Uber is going to be in big trouble as the car is at fault - technically speaking - because these cars use laser scanners. Lasers do not need light to detect objects. The sensor on a video camera needs light to be able to record what it sees. Lasers don't. If its lasers can fail to pick up the woman crossing the road then there can be massive loop holes in the software and or in its fundamental design.

Jmuzz
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Jmuzz » Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:08 pm

This is the location shown above from a better camera, so it's not a dark low vision location at all.

Image

Scintilla
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:36 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Scintilla » Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:48 pm

Lukeyboy wrote:Uber is going to be in big trouble as the car is at fault - technically speaking - because these cars use laser scanners. Lasers do not need light to detect objects. The sensor on a video camera needs light to be able to record what it sees. Lasers don't. If its lasers can fail to pick up the woman crossing the road then there can be massive loop holes in the software and or in its fundamental design.

Yep. Equipped with Radar and LiDAR. None of this dependent upon environmental light.

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/lidar.html

The. Sensors, Failed. To. Detect. A. Human!

And IF these autonomous vehicles really are the bees-knees, how does the data-base on roads allow the car to drive at 40 mph in a 35 mph zone??

AdelaidePeter
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby AdelaidePeter » Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:10 pm

Scintilla wrote:And IF these autonomous vehicles really are the bees-knees, how does the data-base on roads allow the car to drive at 40 mph in a 35 mph zone??


The speed limit is 45 mph, according to Google Street View.

Scintilla
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:36 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Scintilla » Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:15 pm

Abject failure at the core principles!!

Scintilla
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:36 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Scintilla » Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:16 pm

AdelaidePeter wrote:
Scintilla wrote:And IF these autonomous vehicles really are the bees-knees, how does the data-base on roads allow the car to drive at 40 mph in a 35 mph zone??


The speed limit is 45 mph, according to Google Street View.

OK, well then it would seem that Google data may be a significant flaw. It has been stated in several reports that the road speed limit was 35 mph.

AdelaidePeter
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby AdelaidePeter » Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:16 pm

Jmuzz wrote:This is the location shown above from a better camera, so it's not a dark low vision location at all.


And even if it was dark: if the driver (human or otherwise) can't see more than 15-20 metres of road, they shouldn't be going as fast as they were.

AdelaidePeter
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby AdelaidePeter » Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:21 pm

Scintilla wrote:
AdelaidePeter wrote:
Scintilla wrote:And IF these autonomous vehicles really are the bees-knees, how does the data-base on roads allow the car to drive at 40 mph in a 35 mph zone??


The speed limit is 45 mph, according to Google Street View.

OK, well then it would seem that Google data may be a significant flaw. It has been stated in several reports that the road speed limit was 35 mph.


(sarcasm on) What? A mistake in a news report? How unusual! (sarcasm off)

Anyway as I said a minute ago, if the car could only "see" the woman when when it was 15-20 metres from her, it should have been doing well under either of those speeds.

Scintilla
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:36 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Scintilla » Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:28 pm

Standard urban speed limit in the US tends to be 35 mph. 60 and 70 mph on the open highways.

Despite any street-lighting or not, the radar and lidar should have detected the woman well before decision time. If not, the vehicle is unsafe for any road, at any speed.

AdelaidePeter
Posts: 477
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby AdelaidePeter » Thu Mar 22, 2018 10:45 pm

Scintilla wrote:Standard urban speed limit in the US tends to be 35 mph. 60 and 70 mph on the open highways.


You can go into Google Street View and check it yourself. A few news sources are also pointing this out.

Scintilla wrote:Despite any street-lighting or not, the radar and lidar should have detected the woman well before decision time. If not, the vehicle is unsafe for any road, at any speed.


I'm not sure about "any" road, but I agree it was unsuitable for that area at that speed.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Mar 22, 2018 11:34 pm

WyvernRH wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:While not specifically commenting on this incident, I can see another "not my fault" excuse coming to the fray;
1. The Autonomous mode drives conservatively complying with all traffic laws and applying safe practices
2. The occupant wants to get there quicker, not leave a gap to the car in front to prevent others cutting in etc etc
3. To achieve 2. the occupant drives manually
4. An incident occurs
5. The occupant says the vehicle was in autonomous mode


Ah but... the autonomous vehicle will have a log in the computer somewhere (probably only available to authorized access) which will record everything the car does, when it did it, why it did it and who did it if an external command. So in the above case interrogation of the log by the constabulary would reveal the user to have ordered the car to hand over control using their personal command code or token (whatever). Probably also going to be used if authorities want to know where you have been and at what times.
A bit like an aircraft's black box.

Richard

Privacy act will prevent the data being handed over
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

road_warrior
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:04 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby road_warrior » Fri Mar 23, 2018 4:33 am

mikesbytes wrote:Privacy act will prevent the data being handed over


Rubbish. Have you heard of a warrant?

They will determine what the problem is, react to it. If the problem is the car, then they will fix the car. That is the benefit of self driving cars. Once you roll out a fix to all cars, then every single car will benefit.

If this was a driver, and the driver was found to be at fault, then the fix would be to suspend their license, or maybe give them a suspended sentence. You can't roll out a fix to all humans.

Ultimately there is the opportunity to make the road a safe place for all... remove the human element.

User avatar
Strawburger
Posts: 1712
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:19 pm
Location: Dulwich Hill, Sydney

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Strawburger » Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:52 am

From a road design perspective, having a pedestrian crossing on a road that is 70km/h is dangerous. It wouldn't pass any road safety audit here and I'm surprised it would in the US.
n=10 (2013 & 2004 roads,2010 track,2x 2009 foldups,1990 hybrid,1992 trainer,2007 rental,1970's step through,1980's zeus)

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby mikesbytes » Fri Mar 23, 2018 9:07 am

road_warrior wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:Privacy act will prevent the data being handed over


Rubbish. Have you heard of a warrant?

They will determine what the problem is, react to it. If the problem is the car, then they will fix the car. That is the benefit of self driving cars. Once you roll out a fix to all cars, then every single car will benefit.

If this was a driver, and the driver was found to be at fault, then the fix would be to suspend their license, or maybe give them a suspended sentence. You can't roll out a fix to all humans.

Ultimately there is the opportunity to make the road a safe place for all... remove the human element.


A warrant to recover deleted data?
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
find_bruce
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 8009
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby find_bruce » Fri Mar 23, 2018 10:08 am

Does anyone know the conditions imposed on Uber for their test? I expect that they would include a requirement that a licenced driver be behind the wheel at all times. If I am right, the idiot behind the wheel is in the same trouble as uber as the dashboard cam clearly shows that he was not paying the slightest bit of attention to the road in front of him.

The drivers reported comment “it was like a flash, the person walked out in front of them,” is yet another example that the SMIDSY is just an excuse for not looking.

Will uber and the driver face criminal charges for what would now appear to be their negligence?

User avatar
find_bruce
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 8009
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby find_bruce » Fri Mar 23, 2018 10:16 am

mikesbytes wrote:A warrant to recover deleted data?

The warrant would be to recover the data which would demonstrate deletion or modification. The deliberate destruction of evidence will count against them.

I recall a case a couple of years ago where the driver deleted video footage & that was held against him. My google skills aren't up to finding it right now

User avatar
bychosis
Posts: 5733
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:10 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby bychosis » Fri Mar 23, 2018 10:32 am

find_bruce wrote:Does anyone know the conditions imposed on Uber for their test? I expect that they would include a requirement that a licenced driver be behind the wheel at all times. If I am right, the idiot behind the wheel is in the same trouble as uber as the dashboard cam clearly shows that he was not paying the slightest bit of attention to the road in front of him.


Humans are notoriously poor at concentrating. Give them something where the machine does the work and you are supposed to monitor the machine, and the concentration very quickly almost vanishes. I can imagine sitting there 'waiting' for the car to do something would be mind numbingly boring and I'm not surprised the 'driver' wan't looking. Not saying it's an excuse, but expecting someone to just sit there 'just in case' is a recipe for distraction.
bychosis (bahy-koh-sis): A mental disorder of delusions indicating impaired contact with a reality of no bicycles.

User avatar
Howzat
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:08 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Howzat » Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:08 am

find_bruce wrote:Does anyone know the conditions imposed on Uber for their test?


Very few. They asked to test on public roads in California and were refused permission. They asked in Arizona and were accepted. It's a new field so there are no established rules or standards. Decisions are made by politics, lobbyists, investment bankers who think Uber is a technology company, and the usual inanities.

Maybe out of this we will get some better standards. Before, there were plenty who considered it a foregone conclusion that of course driverless cars will be safer because, like technology and stuff man. The early empirical evidence is challenging that idea.

The evidence indicates they're worse than drunk drivers, today. Keep them on the test track and in the lab until they do better. Personally I think that's going to be in 10-20 years for limited applications, which is well outside Uber's survival window, but will be within the reach of Google, car companies, and other research entities who haven't bet all their finance chips on the next hand being a royal flush.

Scintilla
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:36 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Scintilla » Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:14 am

mikesbytes wrote:A warrant to recover deleted data?


IF an autonomous vehicle allows for the deletion of crucial operating data, then the basic design is flawed, and the law MUST over-rule it.

Scintilla
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:36 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Scintilla » Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:18 am

bychosis wrote:
find_bruce wrote:Does anyone know the conditions imposed on Uber for their test? I expect that they would include a requirement that a licenced driver be behind the wheel at all times. If I am right, the idiot behind the wheel is in the same trouble as uber as the dashboard cam clearly shows that he was not paying the slightest bit of attention to the road in front of him.


Humans are notoriously poor at concentrating. Give them something where the machine does the work and you are supposed to monitor the machine, and the concentration very quickly almost vanishes. I can imagine sitting there 'waiting' for the car to do something would be mind numbingly boring and I'm not surprised the 'driver' wan't looking. Not saying it's an excuse, but expecting someone to just sit there 'just in case' is a recipe for distraction.


Generally when this sort of thing is applied the result is that the otherwise unoccupied monitoring human either gets distracted by other stuff (reading a book, texts, FB), or just goes to sleep :lol: within a VERY short time span.

human909
Posts: 9123
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby human909 » Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:22 am

bychosis wrote:Not saying it's an excuse, but expecting someone to just sit there 'just in case' is a recipe for distraction.

So much this.

A autonomous system can't be right 98% of the time and then expect a human to intervene in split seconds 2% of the time. If you have slower response requirement then that is fine (aka autopilot on a plane). Doesn't quite work in the case of a motor vehicle.

Even an otherwise alert human is going to be less alert for the unexpected on a straight a boring road vs a twisty mountain road.

User avatar
silentC
Posts: 2425
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Far South Coast NSW

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby silentC » Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:43 am

Eye tracking software and an electric shock would fix that.

Image
"If your next bike does not have disc brakes, the bike after that certainly will"
- Me

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cyclophiliac