Apple co-founder: 'I've really given up' on Level 5

[Gurgeh]

Honestly, driverless cars can't work on existing roadways, especially around town. Too many variables. I can see them working on specially constructed new interstates built for AVs only, used by long-haul fleets. But around town, in the fog, ice and snow, through construction zones with flagmen, in the midst of baby carriages and kids chasing balls, without changes to U.S. liability laws and our litigious culture, etc.?  No.

Edited November 2, 2019 by Gurgeh

[rperez817]

7 hours ago, akirby said:

There isn’t anything that needs to be learned. Keep the vehicle in the lane and stop if something is in front of you.

 

7 hours ago, akirby said:

And obey traffic laws.

 

Regardless of when or if they learned those things, way too many human drivers fail to do them. These and other driver errors account for about 94% of all motor vehicle crashes in the U.S. according to NHTSA.

 

Self-Driving Coalition (Ford Motor Company is one of the founding members) general counsel David Strickland said this a couple years ago. https://www.selfdrivingcoalition.org/

 

Quote

"With more than 37,000 lives lost on U.S. roads and highways last year, it is critical that policymakers support the safety benefits of fully self-driving technology. The United States cannot continue to witness these year-over-year increases in traffic fatalities. Human error causes 94 percent of all motor vehicle crashes, due to mistakes like speeding, fatigue and drunk and distracted driving. By removing humans from the driving process, self-driving vehicles offer an opportunity to significantly reduce the number of our loved ones killed and injured in crashes each year."

Edited November 3, 2019 by rperez817

[rperez817]

3 hours ago, Gurgeh said:

U.S. liability laws and our litigious culture, etc.

 

This is a major issue, probably the biggest hindrance currently to getting AVs (SAE Level 3 or above) deployed en masse in the U.S.

[Footballfan]

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

 

 

Regardless of when or if they learned those things, way too many human drivers fail to do them. These and other driver errors account for about 94% of all motor vehicle crashes in the U.S. according to NHTSA.

 

Self-Driving Coalition (Ford Motor Company is one of the founding members) general counsel David Strickland said this a couple years ago. https://www.selfdrivingcoalition.org/

 

What Stickland is saying is a crock.  One software flaw or good hack job would singlehandedly kill more people in one hour than human error causes in a year. The Self Driving Coalition is a bunch of hypocrites that could care less about fatalities.  If safety and saving lives is truly the name of the game, a licensed driver will be mandated behind the wheel of a vehicle -automated or not- to take over when the inevitable failures of the autonomous system occur.  Safety technology such as automated braking, rear cross-path detection, etc along with technology that blocks texting when the vehicle is moving and stricter enforcement of current laws on distracted driving and stiffer penalties for doing so are a far better way to go.  

 

Another factor to consider is that a lot of people enjoy driving and the vast majority take the privilege of driving seriously.  Why punish the good drivers and take away their freedom to go anywhere they want when the want to for the sake of those who abuse the privilege?   It is kind of like rounding up all the good people and putting them in prison to protect them from the bad guys.  

 

Finally, do we really want government taking privilege away from us for "our own good" Big Brother style?  If you are going to take driving away because we could get hurt or killed, motorcycles, power boats, bicycles, guns and fatty foods are next.  

[akirby]

11 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

Regardless of when or if they learned those things, way too many human drivers fail to do them. These and other driver errors account for about 94% of all motor vehicle crashes in the U.S. according to NHTSA.

Exactly.  So having those safety features active as driver assists will save just as many lives.

 

There is no safety feature/driving scenario for AVs that can’t be applied as driver assists just as effectively.

[rperez817]

47 minutes ago, akirby said:

So having those safety features active as driver assists will save just as many lives.

 

Level 1 and Level 2 ADAS features can certainly help reduce car crashes and fatalities, data show they already are in vehicles currently equipped with them. But Level 5 automation can have a bigger impact because limitations of human drivers & human error are taken out of the picture completely. From one of the research papers on the Self-Driving Coalition site.

 

Quote

"The current generation of intelligent-vehicle technology (lane-departure warnings, pedestrian detection, parking assist, adaptive cruise control, etc.) is already yielding many safety benefits and will offer even more as the technology grows more sophisticated and drivers make the transition to newer vehicles. But completely driverless cars will likely have an even greater impact. On balance, driverless vehicles will save lives by preventing harm from bad drivers, even if a driverless vehicle is not necessarily superior to an alert driver in every situation. For instance, the response time of a computer directing the primary functions of a vehicle, informed by an advanced sensor suite capable of calculating and recalculating changing positions and circumstances in fractions of a second, is bound to respond better than the average driver. While a computer won’t be 100 percent perfect 100 percent of the time, it will likely come much closer to achieving a level of control and awareness that no human could claim to possess."

Edited November 3, 2019 by rperez817