Autonomous cars? I think not

[redsonic]

the Tesla autopilot details are here
It does say several times

Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Capability are intended for use with a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment.

And the problem is that very few people can remain fully attentive when the car is doing most of the decision making. Humans are very poor at monitoring tasks when their input is very rarely needed.

[find_bruce]

And the problem is that very few people can remain fully attentive when the car is doing most of the decision making. Humans are very poor at monitoring tasks when their input is very rarely needed.

While true, there are also ways of monitoring for an inattentive driver - the Volvo XC90 SUV involved in the death of Elaine Herzberg was capable of detecting driver awareness - but Uber disconnected that system as well as automatic braking.

[tallywhacker]

not sure that you agree to those terms about autopilot but I do hope that it will stop her claiming that it was autopilots fault

[Andy01]

the Tesla autopilot details are here
It does say several times

Autopilot and Full Self-Driving Capability are intended for use with a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment.

And the problem is that very few people can remain fully attentive when the car is doing most of the decision making. Humans are very poor at monitoring tasks when their input is very rarely needed.

I have just taken delivery of a Subaru Outback Touring and it has a driver monitoring system that is quite "zealous". If I am using the adaptive cruise control and lane keeping (self-steering) and take my eyes off the road or let go of the steering wheel for more than a second or two it gives both visual and audible alerts. I am not aware of a way to turn the system off (perhaps a dealer can ?), nor would I want to.

[g-boaf]

not sure that you agree to those terms about autopilot but I do hope that it will stop her claiming that it was autopilots fault

The current systems in cars we can buy are really not intended for fully automated driving.

You have to look at the prototype Mercedes S-Class Drive Pilot and see the massive level of redundancy, LiDAR sensors, multiple cameras, etc. Its a level above others and yet still isn’t on the road for us to buy.

[zebee]

I recall an interview with Sullenberger the pilot who landed a plane on the Hudson river.

They were talking about autopilots and if that tech was applicable to cars. He said
"When we assign technology as the doer and the human component as
the monitor, we’re doing it backwards. Humans are inherently poor
monitors. "

So the tech can see a problem and alert you but it's bad at deciding what to do about it. So we have very good tech for lane monitoring and speed control and bad tech for deciding when to start or stop.

Problem is that people want a chauffeur not a backseat driver.

[redsonic]

I recall an interview with Sullenberger the pilot who landed a plane on the Hudson river.

They were talking about autopilots and if that tech was applicable to cars. He said
"When we assign technology as the doer and the human component as
the monitor, we’re doing it backwards. Humans are inherently poor
monitors. "

So the tech can see a problem and alert you but it's bad at deciding what to do about it. So we have very good tech for lane monitoring and speed control and bad tech for deciding when to start or stop.

Problem is that people want a chauffeur not a backseat driver.

Very true, especially the last line!

[g-boaf]

I recall an interview with Sullenberger the pilot who landed a plane on the Hudson river.

They were talking about autopilots and if that tech was applicable to cars. He said
"When we assign technology as the doer and the human component as
the monitor, we’re doing it backwards. Humans are inherently poor
monitors. "

So the tech can see a problem and alert you but it's bad at deciding what to do about it. So we have very good tech for lane monitoring and speed control and bad tech for deciding when to start or stop.

Problem is that people want a chauffeur not a backseat driver.

Some of them are getting quite good, like knowing when to do emergency braking but also knowing when to stop the emergency braking because the avoidance was successful. Also knowing when other cars or people are around and what to do in those situations.

There are big gaps in this technology capability between manufacturers and also big differences in the actual technology used for self driving. Tesla insists its cameras are enough but others use a whole suite of different sensors together. I think the latter is the better option, all the different sensors have their own benefits.

So far in the cars we have, there is no full automated driving, only support/assistance. Fully autonomous driving for normal cars is still at prototype stage and is not currently allowed by law except for trials (at least in most countries).

[Cyclophiliac]

I recall an interview with Sullenberger the pilot who landed a plane on the Hudson river.

They were talking about autopilots and if that tech was applicable to cars. He said
"When we assign technology as the doer and the human component as
the monitor, we’re doing it backwards. Humans are inherently poor
monitors. "

So the tech can see a problem and alert you but it's bad at deciding what to do about it. So we have very good tech for lane monitoring and speed control and bad tech for deciding when to start or stop.

Problem is that people want a chauffeur not a backseat driver.

Some of them are getting quite good, like knowing when to do emergency braking but also knowing when to stop the emergency braking because the avoidance was successful. Also knowing when other cars or people are around and what to do in those situations.

There are big gaps in this technology capability between manufacturers and also big differences in the actual technology used for self driving. Tesla insists its cameras are enough but others use a whole suite of different sensors together. I think the latter is the better option, all the different sensors have their own benefits.

So far in the cars we have, there is no full automated driving, only support/assistance. Fully autonomous driving for normal cars is still at prototype stage and is not currently allowed by law except for trials (at least in most countries).

Yes, multi-sensor tracking is a good idea here. Air-traffic control systems use it also, for the same reason: the different sensor types each have their own [dis]advantages.

[Thoglette]

. Fully autonomous driving for normal cars is still at wishful thinking stage

Fixed it for you.

See the article
from The Guardian earlier on this page for a reminder why.
(Edit link added )

[g-boaf]

. Fully autonomous driving for normal cars is still at wishful thinking stage

Fixed it for you.

See the article from The Guardian earlier on this page for a reminder why I think automated driving is the future..

Fixed it for you as well.

[Ross]

Active safety and autonomous driving technology still have some way to go before reducing the national road toll

https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/govern ... h-pitfalls

Another issue is those who can afford a newer vehicle with modern driver assistance technology often drive off the dealership forecourt with little or no knowledge on how to select, operate, and maintain their vehicles to optimise safety outcomes.

Then there is the fact that advanced driver assistance technology could lead to complacency.

"We can't just assume that people will know automatically what the systems will do."

According to the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of Australia (HFESA), "some advanced driver assistance systems that we have in cars now can encourage what we call this negative behavioural adaptation, but to different extents. Even something like adaptive cruise control…can make people…a bit complacent".

HFESA also noted that unrealistic expectations around autonomous safety features may be due to marketers overemphasising the benefits of those features without educating drivers on how they should be used.

[Ross]

Empty autonomous car pulled over by police, tries to flee

https://www.drive.com.au/news/empty-aut ... s-to-flee/

New footage has emerged of an empty autonomous car being pulled over by police in the US – before it appears to drive off.

The Chevrolet Bolt electric hatch – operated by General Motors autonomous company Cruise – was travelling through the streets of San Francisco at night without headlights and with no occupants on board when it was stopped by police.

fter initially stopping, the autonomous vehicle – which was equipped with radar, camera and laser beacons to 'read' the road – lurches forward as a policeman is looking through the window, before coming to a stop further up the street with its hazard lights on.

While many on social media suggested the car was attempting to flee, General Motors claims it was moving to a safer location due to its proximity to moving traffic.

In official statement, General Motors said: “Our autonomous vehicle yielded to the police vehicle, then pulled over to the nearest safe location for the traffic stop, as intended.

“An officer contacted Cruise personnel and no citation was issued … We work closely with the SFPD on how to interact with our vehicles in situations like this.”

San Francisco police have not released a statement on the incident, however Drive has contacted the department for further information.

[mikesbytes]

Empty autonomous car pulled over by police, tries to flee

https://www.drive.com.au/news/empty-aut ... s-to-flee/

New footage has emerged of an empty autonomous car being pulled over by police in the US – before it appears to drive off.

The Chevrolet Bolt electric hatch – operated by General Motors autonomous company Cruise – was travelling through the streets of San Francisco at night without headlights and with no occupants on board when it was stopped by police.

fter initially stopping, the autonomous vehicle – which was equipped with radar, camera and laser beacons to 'read' the road – lurches forward as a policeman is looking through the window, before coming to a stop further up the street with its hazard lights on.

While many on social media suggested the car was attempting to flee, General Motors claims it was moving to a safer location due to its proximity to moving traffic.

In official statement, General Motors said: “Our autonomous vehicle yielded to the police vehicle, then pulled over to the nearest safe location for the traffic stop, as intended.

“An officer contacted Cruise personnel and no citation was issued … We work closely with the SFPD on how to interact with our vehicles in situations like this.”

San Francisco police have not released a statement on the incident, however Drive has contacted the department for further information.

That's funny

Who gets the ticket for driving without the lights on?

[fat and old]

Empty autonomous car pulled over by police, tries to flee

That's funny

Who gets the ticket for driving without the lights on?

It's a [pisser . Even funnier watching the vid

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/dr ... 25b170edc9

Edit...It didn't try to go on the lam, it moved to a safe place to pull over and hit the warning lights.

[mikesbytes]

Empty autonomous car pulled over by police, tries to flee

That's funny

Who gets the ticket for driving without the lights on?

It's a [pisser . Even funnier watching the vid

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/dr ... 25b170edc9

Edit...It didn't try to go on the lam, it moved to a safe place to pull over and hit the warning lights.

LOL the Police don't know what to do, I don't blame them for that, one is on the phone presumably seeking advice

[warthog1]

That MSN link didn't work with a video for me.

Apparently there is a "Cruise" company phone number that can be called the newsreader says.

[g-boaf]

Empty autonomous car pulled over by police, tries to flee

https://www.drive.com.au/news/empty-aut ... s-to-flee/

New footage has emerged of an empty autonomous car being pulled over by police in the US – before it appears to drive off.

The Chevrolet Bolt electric hatch – operated by General Motors autonomous company Cruise – was travelling through the streets of San Francisco at night without headlights and with no occupants on board when it was stopped by police.

fter initially stopping, the autonomous vehicle – which was equipped with radar, camera and laser beacons to 'read' the road – lurches forward as a policeman is looking through the window, before coming to a stop further up the street with its hazard lights on.

While many on social media suggested the car was attempting to flee, General Motors claims it was moving to a safer location due to its proximity to moving traffic.

In official statement, General Motors said: “Our autonomous vehicle yielded to the police vehicle, then pulled over to the nearest safe location for the traffic stop, as intended.

“An officer contacted Cruise personnel and no citation was issued … We work closely with the SFPD on how to interact with our vehicles in situations like this.”

San Francisco police have not released a statement on the incident, however Drive has contacted the department for further information.

That's funny

Who gets the ticket for driving without the lights on?

This is where technology is leaving law enforcement far behind.

[trailgumby]

Empty autonomous car pulled over by police, tries to flee

https://www.drive.com.au/news/empty-aut ... s-to-flee/

That's funny

Who gets the ticket for driving without the lights on?

This is where technology is leaving law enforcement far behind.

'
At least nobody got shot this time for driving while black.

[zebee]

awake from the dead o thread!

https://medium.com/starsky-robotics-blo ... b8a6a8a5f5

Where a startup doing self driving trucks talks about why they had to shut down despite a very successful prototype. Including that problem that VCs like flash and aren't interested in safety...

[Thoglette]

When self-driving cars crash, who’s responsible? Courts and insurers need to know what’s inside the ‘black box’

Published: May 25, 2022 6.03am AEST
Aaron J. Snoswell, Henry Fraser, Rhyle Simcock, Queensland University of Technology
The Conversation

Pretty straightforward introduction into the legal framework; challenges and some applicable case law,

[mikesbytes]

When self-driving cars crash, who’s responsible? Courts and insurers need to know what’s inside the ‘black box’

Published: May 25, 2022 6.03am AEST
Aaron J. Snoswell, Henry Fraser, Rhyle Simcock, Queensland University of Technology
The Conversation

Pretty straightforward introduction into the legal framework; challenges and some applicable case law,

I see a significant problem being situations where the self driving car decides to get the occupant to take over. There is a unacceptable delay before the occupant takes over as the occupant is not paying attention

[Thoglette]

The fun continues
US regulators move a step closer to recalling Tesla vehicles with Autopilot automated driving systems ABC/wires

[antigee]

I'm not a fan of youtube journalism - a lot of watching for what can be read in a minute....but a couple of (possibly) interesting points Tesla has removed forward facing radar and the video includes a graph of Tesla vehicle collisions v human drivers with the collision rate normalised for the environment in which "autopilot" vehicles are supposed to be operated

this video picks up on the recent deaths of 2 motorcyclists rear ended by drivers in Tesla's (2 separate instances)...for those that don't do US freeway talk HOV lane is High Occupation Vehicles

https://youtu.be/yRdzIs4FJJg

going back in time I once nearly rear ended a Citroen 2CV on a multilane highway in the dark...it was chugging up a hill...the rear lights are small low down and spaced only just either side of the number plate ...I processed the vehicle as a lot further away than it was

[g-boaf]

I'm not a fan of youtube journalism - a lot of watching for what can be read in a minute....but a couple of (possibly) interesting points Tesla has removed forward facing radar and the video includes a graph of Tesla vehicle collisions v human drivers with the collision rate normalised for the environment in which "autopilot" vehicles are supposed to be operated

this video picks up on the recent deaths of 2 motorcyclists rear ended by drivers in Tesla's (2 separate instances)...for those that don't do US freeway talk HOV lane is High Occupation Vehicles

https://youtu.be/yRdzIs4FJJg

going back in time I once nearly rear ended a Citroen 2CV on a multilane highway in the dark...it was chugging up a hill...the rear lights are small low down and spaced only just either side of the number plate ...I processed the vehicle as a lot further away than it was

I prefer the non Tesla brands that use a bigger variety of sensor types instead of putting reliance on just a few technologies.

Sure those are legacy manufacturers who don’t know how to build EVs or to do so efficiently (according to some), but it’s a safer option.