Autonomous cars

[CraigHew]

ah well, sell-driving cars are f*cked....

edit. one just killed a lady in the USA

[Terry Everall]

Nota real surprise IMHO

[CosKev]

Pretty sure a bloke died last year in a Tesla in USA driving on auto pilot?

Went under a lorry trailer that pulled out into his path as he was watching a film,film was still playing when police got to his car and he was minus his head

[Steve (sdh2903)]

As much as I think that autonomous cars are a complete and utter waste of time and massive amounts of money, the report does state that the lady wasn't on a proper crossing. So no matter if a computer or a mere mortal driving sounds like if someone steps out into the road unexpectedly the end result is the same. Computers can't alter physics. 

[Nick Algar - Competition Secretary]

I've got mixed feelings about this. Every time I drive down a motorway on a reasonable length journey I always think how much better it would be if a computer was controlling the cars and we dialled in the speed we wanted to do, then let it take over. Fixed distance to other vehicles at same speed. No jumping in and out. no mucking about to do 1 or 2 mph difference and I'm sure traffic would flow much smoother and we would fit more vehicles in. 

 

Sounds great, then ................ I remember the Numpties  

 

Oh, and I was down in Farneham the other day and a friend came over from Essex to join the group for evening meal. In a Tesla with the Advanced Autopilot, which basically drove him there and back. He just sat there ready to take over if it made a mistake. Reckons he loves it and he's a car guy.

[SootySport]

Trouble is computers are built and programmed by humans.  They will always be fallible.

[DonPeffers]

9 hours ago, SootySport said:

Trouble is computers are built and programmed by humans.  They will always be fallible.

and hackable.

[andy665]

Its a deeply flawed technology that is nothing like as advanced as the manufacturers would have us believe.

Just a couple of years ago I was doing some work with Lexus and the documentation relating to the circumstances when things like pedestrian will not work was far longer than the circumstances when it does work - some instances when it will not work - below and above certain heights, carrying shopping bags, holding an open umbrella, pushing a pushchair, heavy rain, snow, fog etc etc

Let us not forget how inherently stupid a large number of people are - a level of autonomous driving ability will give them the ability to switch off to an even greater extent than they already are

Its all great in theory - the execution of it is a minefield and the technology is simply not there yet to bring the concept to a full reality

 

 

[DonPeffers]

 Mar. 19th 2018       https://electrek.co/2018/03/19/uber-self-driving-prototyp-fatal-crash-police/

"When first testing their cars in California, they had some issues with the authorities which led the California DMV to shut down Uber’s unlicensed self-driving car program in reaction to footage of a prototype running a red light in front of a pedestrian.

The company claimed that the vehicle was being driven by the engineer at the time it ran a red light, but other reports contradicted Uber’s statement.

It led to them moving most of their effort to Arizona, where one of their prototypes was quickly involved in an accident – though the police said Uber was not at fault.

And now this tragic fatal accident that is adding to Uber’s long list of problems with their self-driving vehicle program."

The Police will investigate to establish where any fault lay.

Update: Uber said that they are halting their test program following the accident.

[DonPeffers]

20 MARCH 2018      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/03/20/ubers-self-driving-car-speeding-killed-pedestrian-police-reveal/

"Uber's self-driving car was speeding when it killed pedestrian, police reveal. Tempe Police said the car was travelling at around 40 mph in a 35 mph zone and preliminary investigations suggest the SUV failed to slow down before hitting Ms Herzberg."

Article says car was in autonomous mode with a safety driver aboard BUT did not brake before accident.

Bad one!

[jeff oakley]

Having seen the footage of this incident there is no way that a human would have avoided that accident. The problem is the car should have if the technology was working correctly.

They have infra red cameras and sensors, they have satellite positioning and yet the car was speeding and it did not see the pedestrian at all.

I think we are a long time away from this being the norm and accidents will happen.

The supporters say there will be less accidents and progress always involves set backs but to me there seems to be a race to come up with  the first autonomous car that is suitable for the masses and it is getting there first that is important to some. Imagine the damage a 44 ton truck will do if a system fails to notice a traffic queue for example or an unhackable system is hacked?

In my opinion it is technology that is not needed, what we do is take licences off people who cannot drive, enforce lane discipline  and where needed improve public transport and infrastructure of roads.

[DonPeffers]

I found this Jeff    http://fox5sandiego.com/2018/03/21/police-release-footage-from-self-driving-uber-that-killed-pedestrian/

A major flaw if the software can't keep the car within the designated speed limit and the car did not apply the brakes at all.

However   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5529453/Video-shows-moment-pedestrian-killed-self-driving-Uber-car.html  and quotes speed limit as 45 and car doing 38 whereas Telegraph had quoted car doing 40+ in 35 zone.

Will need to wait on Police report.

Added-----Are the Uber autonomous cars driving around at night when traffic density low so they can claim X thousand miles tested?

[Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman]

Hmm, a worrying, though perhaps easy to understand, lack of attention from the safety driver. They couldn’t necessarily have done much, but they may end up as something of a scapegoat.

[Steve (sdh2903)]

Few points having seen the video. 

1. Would a human driving been able to avoid that collision as you couldn't see the pedestrian until in headlight range? Possible jab of brake to slow slightly or swerve? It was only a split second.

2. What is the human "monitor" there to actually do? Because they weren't paying attention as Dave said.

3. Why didn't the front facing radar pick that up? My lowly golf with fwd radar picks up pedestrians, cyclists even small dogs. 

[Kevin Wood]

I'm sure the human eye would have had significantly better resolving power in low light than the camera, so probably would have seen the pedestrian before she was visible in the video, if paying attention. As to whether that would have been enough - who knows?

An alert human driver might have picked up clues as to the likelihood of someone crossing the road in that area and slowed down beforehand.

The overriding thing that video demonstrates to me is that, if you take the primary task of driving the car away from a human, they are basically useless from a safety point of view. The inside view shows the human gazing at the dashboard for long periods of time as if she's sitting on a bus. This should not come as a surprise. It's been happening in aviation with increasing automation, and, although automation has made flying far safer overall, in instances where the human pilot is required to take control, they are often found lacking. For example, Air France 447.

I know we have to start somewhere, but partial automation is a very dangerous thing, in my view, and the fact that we still have "drivers" in vehicles operating in completely controlled environments such as the railway network and commercial air traffic environment suggests that autonomous vehicles are a long way off.