ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 27th March 2018, 05:04 AM   #321
The Great Zaganza
Illuminator
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 4,063
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernard.../#48776ca30f04

Quote:
In fact, all Tesla vehicles – whether or not they are Autopilot enabled – send data directly to the cloud.
http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla...is-used-2017-6

Quote:
"One of Tesla's huge advantages in the autonomous driving space is that it has tens of thousands of cars already on the road," Lattner wrote. "We built infrastructure to take advantage of this, allowing the collection of image and video data from this fleet, as well as building big data infrastructure in the cloud to process and use it."
__________________
"When someone asks you if you're a god, you say "YES"!"
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 05:16 AM   #322
Disbelief
Master Poster
 
Disbelief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,537
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
And? Still nearly zero autonomous miles.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/dossier...-driving-cars/

Not even considered in the Top 10.

Or here

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-c...-4#13-toyota-6
__________________
Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same?

Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman
Disbelief is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 05:17 AM   #323
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,912
Originally Posted by Disbelief View Post
And integrating new hardware into their system I can't believe would be that simple. They have nearly zero mile of true autonomous driving.
Controlling the car is the easy part. The challenge is to accurately sense the environment and make the right control decisions. We don't need true autonomous driving right now. We need more experienced controllers.

And that can be accomplished by having sensors and controllers ride along with human drivers in real world conditions. Having lots of data about how the system perceived the environment, and what control decisions it made, is probably a lot more important at this stage than any amount of true autonomous driving.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 05:19 AM   #324
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,360
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
I wonder how Tesla is going to deal with GDPR.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 05:20 AM   #325
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 22,999
Originally Posted by KAJ View Post
Draw the diagrams. It depends (inter alia) on distances from the junction. For right angle junctions you only need 90° when at the junction.
I have, though with my lack of computer graphics skills you might be offended to see them Hell, I'll bodge something in Paint ...

In both cases the cars are converging on the junction. On the left the Tesla (at the bottom) needs 90° to see the other two. On the right it needs more like 180° to see the other one.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg tesla radar.jpg (7.5 KB, 8 views)
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 05:21 AM   #326
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,912
Originally Posted by Disbelief View Post
And? Still nearly zero autonomous miles.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/dossier...-driving-cars/

Not even considered in the Top 10.

Or here

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-c...-4#13-toyota-6
On the other hand, Tesla probably has a lot more data on the kind of scenario in this thread, than Uber does.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 05:38 AM   #327
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,360
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
I have, though with my lack of computer graphics skills you might be offended to see them Hell, I'll bodge something in Paint ...

In both cases the cars are converging on the junction. On the left the Tesla (at the bottom) needs 90° to see the other two. On the right it needs more like 180° to see the other one.
That second junction looks very familiar...
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 05:49 AM   #328
KAJ
New Blood
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 6
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
I have, though with my lack of computer graphics skills you might be offended to see them Hell, I'll bodge something in Paint ...

In both cases the cars are converging on the junction. On the left the Tesla (at the bottom) needs 90° to see the other two. On the right it needs more like 180° to see the other one.
Aah. I misread you as meaning it needed 90° on each side for a total of 180° when you actually meant a total of 90°. Mea culpa.
KAJ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 06:23 AM   #329
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 22,999
Originally Posted by KAJ View Post
Aah. I misread you as meaning it needed 90° on each side for a total of 180° when you actually meant a total of 90°. Mea culpa.
No worries. I should have copied the Tesla brochure's diagram into my post, but it's rather large.

Welcome to the forum, by the way
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 06:29 AM   #330
Disbelief
Master Poster
 
Disbelief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,537
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
On the other hand, Tesla probably has a lot more data on the kind of scenario in this thread, than Uber does.
Don't know, don't know the capabilities of their system. Once again though, Uber isn't close to being a leader in the autonomous technology so I'd be more curious how Tesla stacks up to Waymo (Google) and Cruise (GM).
__________________
Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same?

Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman
Disbelief is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 06:34 AM   #331
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,912
Originally Posted by Disbelief View Post
Don't know, don't know the capabilities of their system. Once again though, Uber isn't close to being a leader in the autonomous technology so I'd be more curious how Tesla stacks up to Waymo (Google) and Cruise (GM).
Probably comes down to how many sensor platforms each company has on the road.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 09:30 AM   #332
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,510
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
For some intersections here you'd need about 180° to safely spot other traffic. (And often it has right of way...)
Merging and lane changing comes to mind. Probably 270° to be honest - i want my AV to be able to see in what would be a human's blind spot.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 09:32 AM   #333
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,510
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Probably comes down to how many sensor platforms each company has on the road.
I've experienced a Tesla performing minor AV here in Vancouver (a friend owns one).

The scenario was autopilot lane change. It was able to detect a car coming up from behind in the target lane, so waited for it to pass.

Side note: isn't that always the way - the car in the next lane sits in your blindspot until you put your ticker on, then they floor it, because I WILL NOT HAVE SOMEBODY IN FRONT OF ME!
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 11:38 AM   #334
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 8,520
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
On the other hand, Tesla probably has a lot more data on the kind of scenario in this thread, than Uber does.
Agree

A vehicle does not need to be actually driving autonomously in order to gather data that could be used in the software for autonomous vehicles.
__________________
► God does not exist!
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 11:39 AM   #335
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,227
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Did it ever detect her? What systems detected her - apart from the bumpers, If they are a part of the detection system?
This amused me far more than it had any right to. Top work.
__________________
Up the River!
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 01:43 PM   #336
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 22,781
I think Prestige and Smartcooky have a point here as well. It seems premature to have the vehicle system in control before it has gathered more data from human drivers and compared their successful actions (and perhaps their failures) against its own expectations.

I keep thinking that this whole debate, interesting and possibly productive as it may be, reflects a perennial tendency to kick the can down the road when serious issues are present. Perhaps it's unfair to compare it to the issue now raging about gun control but there's a certain similarity. A huge number of people seem to approach that problem as one that needs, not fundamental change, but fortification. Not fewer guns but more guns, more locks, more security, more hardening - even to the zany proposal of Rick Santorum that the students now protesting should put their energy into learning CPR so they can handle the next mass shooting better. Right, you'll feel so much more useful if you keep your classmates breathing as they bleed.

And here is our automotive problem, a mixture of the fact that too many people drive when they are drunk, impaired, badly trained, sleep deprived, and just plain stupid, combined with the big elephant in the room which is that our society is overrun with cars, made unliveably crowded, dangerous, unfriendly and polluted by cars, in part because we as a nation have forsaken public transit. And of course the solution is not to change our dependence on cars or our behavior, but to make it possible for drunk, impaired, sleep deprived and stupid people to go driving without killing so many people. I'll still have to drive 20 miles to catch a bus.

Like many proposals, no doubt it will work better than nothing, at least for a while, but I'm not convinced it's really a good solution.

Of course here I am in my living room pontificating, and I cant say I have any better ideas, but that's true even if I'm right.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 02:00 PM   #337
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,510
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
I keep thinking that this whole debate, interesting and possibly productive as it may be, reflects a perennial tendency to kick the can down the road when serious issues are present.
I was thinking something similar with an earlier reference to this being an "edge case," so let's not dwell on it. Very software developer talk. I'm more from the business side, which is looking for a more comprehensive solution than what's called the minimum viable product.

MVP for AV seems to be "able to navigate from A to B provided there aren't any surprises."

Which is great, but I'll bet most injuries and fatalities are caused by surprises. Moving rare events out of scope could be wasting the investment dollars. It feels like cutting key benefits and leaving a weak, disappointing, product. In my role, when I see that, I just kill the project and save the good money after bad.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 02:08 PM   #338
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,912
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
Side note: isn't that always the way - the car in the next lane sits in your blindspot until you put your ticker on, then they floor it, because I WILL NOT HAVE SOMEBODY IN FRONT OF ME!
My wife is so put off by this behavior that she refuses to put on her turn signal until the moment she starts the lane change. Riding with her on the freeway is maddening, because each lane change requires a lot of squirming in her seat, trying to get a good angle of view in every mirror to make sure there's an opening she can grab before someone "steals" it.

I've tried explaining that if she throws on her signal and that causes someone to speed up, all she has to do is slow down a bit and drop in behind them.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 02:56 PM   #339
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,630
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
I was thinking something similar with an earlier reference to this being an "edge case," so let's not dwell on it. Very software developer talk. I'm more from the business side, which is looking for a more comprehensive solution than what's called the minimum viable product.

MVP for AV seems to be "able to navigate from A to B provided there aren't any surprises."

Which is great, but I'll bet most injuries and fatalities are caused by surprises. Moving rare events out of scope could be wasting the investment dollars. It feels like cutting key benefits and leaving a weak, disappointing, product. In my role, when I see that, I just kill the project and save the good money after bad.
Who said it is an edge case so let's not dwell on it? I thought the statements around edge cases was that when you go from testing on test tracks with a small number of vehicles to testing in public on real roads with a large number of vehicles you will encounter things that the algorithms that worked fine on the test tracks fail to handle. It is stupid to say that the testing on the test track should guarantee that there will be no horrible blunders from the algorithm when exposed to the real world, or that it isn't an edge case because of how obviously horrible the failure of the software was. It is perfectly possible, likely even, that Uber are pushing too fast (for some definition if too fast) but that doesn't stop it being silly to deny this is an edge case, or demand that the cars not be permitted on the road until they are guaranteed not to make such an error. Personally, I don't care if self drive happens any time soon.... but if self drive is going to happen we have to accept that once in a while it may fail and kill some people in circumstances that a human would have had no problem safely handling.

Sent from my Vodafone Smart ultra 6 using Tapatalk
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 03:11 PM   #340
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,630
The fun will come if any Russians get run over by one of these things. :-)

Sent from my Vodafone Smart ultra 6 using Tapatalk
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 03:24 PM   #341
portlandatheist
Master Poster
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,824
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
I think Prestige and Smartcooky have a point here as well. It seems premature to have the vehicle system in control before it has gathered more data from human drivers and compared their successful actions (and perhaps their failures) against its own expectations.

I keep thinking that this whole debate, interesting and possibly productive as it may be, reflects a perennial tendency to kick the can down the road when serious issues are present. Perhaps it's unfair to compare it to the issue now raging about gun control but there's a certain similarity. A huge number of people seem to approach that problem as one that needs, not fundamental change, but fortification. Not fewer guns but more guns, more locks, more security, more hardening - even to the zany proposal of Rick Santorum that the students now protesting should put their energy into learning CPR so they can handle the next mass shooting better. Right, you'll feel so much more useful if you keep your classmates breathing as they bleed.

And here is our automotive problem, a mixture of the fact that too many people drive when they are drunk, impaired, badly trained, sleep deprived, and just plain stupid, combined with the big elephant in the room which is that our society is overrun with cars, made unliveably crowded, dangerous, unfriendly and polluted by cars, in part because we as a nation have forsaken public transit. And of course the solution is not to change our dependence on cars or our behavior, but to make it possible for drunk, impaired, sleep deprived and stupid people to go driving without killing so many people. I'll still have to drive 20 miles to catch a bus.

Like many proposals, no doubt it will work better than nothing, at least for a while, but I'm not convinced it's really a good solution.

Of course here I am in my living room pontificating, and I cant say I have any better ideas, but that's true even if I'm right.
But wouldn't you agree that the incremental hardening and fortification has actually worked quite well for cars? At least relatively. Air bags, anti lock brakes, seat belts, street lighting, car design, drunk driving laws, guard rails, licensing and registration, etc. None of them a silver bullet, but collectively have made driving much safer and these autonomous systems is just another incremental step in that direction, revolutionary in other terms, but just incremental and evolutionary in terms of the paradigm of the personal car with all its imperfections including less tangible ones like urban sprawl.
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 03:31 PM   #342
macdoc
Philosopher
 
macdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Planet earth on slow boil
Posts: 7,903
This is not an edge case ....this is simply poor judgement on a technical choice

Quote:
When Uber decided in 2016 to retire its fleet of self-driving Ford Fusion cars in favor of Volvo sport utility vehicles, it also chose to scale back on one notable piece of technology: the safety sensors used to detect objects in the road.

REUTERS/Natalie Behring/File Photo
That decision resulted in a self-driving vehicle with more blind spots than its own earlier generation of autonomous cars, as well as those of its rivals, according to interviews with five former employees and four industry experts who spoke for the first time about Uber’s technology switch.

Driverless cars are supposed to avoid accidents with lidar – which uses laser light pulses to detect hazards on the road - and other sensors such as radar and cameras. The new Uber driverless vehicle is armed with only one roof-mounted lidar sensor compared with seven lidar units on the older Ford Fusion models Uber employed, according to diagrams prepared by Uber.

In scaling back to a single lidar on the Volvo, Uber introduced a blind zone around the perimeter of the SUV that cannot fully detect pedestrians, according to interviews with former employees and Raj Rajkumar, the head of Carnegie Mellon University’s transportation center who has been working on self-driving technology for over a decade.

The lidar system made by Velodyne - one of the top suppliers of sensors for self-driving vehicles - sees objects in a 360-degree circle around the car, but has a narrow vertical range that prevents it from detecting obstacles low to the ground, according to information on Velodyne’s website as well as former employees who operated the Uber SUVs.

Autonomous vehicles operated by rivals Waymo, Alphabet Inc’s self-driving vehicle unit, have six lidar sensors, while General Motors Co’s vehicle contains five, according to information from the companies.

Uber declined to comment on its decision to reduce its lidar count, and referred questions on the blind spot to Velodyne. Velodyne acknowledged that with the rooftop lidar there is a roughly three meter blind spot around a vehicle, saying that more sensors are necessary.

“If you’re going to avoid pedestrians, you’re going to need to have a side lidar to see those pedestrians and avoid them, especially at night,” Marta Hall, president and chief business development officer at Velodyne, told Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1H337Q

Uber will be found liable
macdoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 10:06 PM   #343
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 12,360
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Who said it is an edge case so let's not dwell on it? I thought the statements around edge cases was that when you go from testing on test tracks with a small number of vehicles to testing in public on real roads with a large number of vehicles you will encounter things that the algorithms that worked fine on the test tracks fail to handle. It is stupid to say that the testing on the test track should guarantee that there will be no horrible blunders from the algorithm when exposed to the real world, or that it isn't an edge case because of how obviously horrible the failure of the software was. It is perfectly possible, likely even, that Uber are pushing too fast (for some definition if too fast) but that doesn't stop it being silly to deny this is an edge case, or demand that the cars not be permitted on the road until they are guaranteed not to make such an error. Personally, I don't care if self drive happens any time soon.... but if self drive is going to happen we have to accept that once in a while it may fail and kill some people in circumstances that a human would have had no problem safely handling.

Sent from my Vodafone Smart ultra 6 using Tapatalk



That's just wrong on fundamental level. Also that'd mean effective ban from residential areas in my country.

Frankly, what is then point of AVs? No safer then human drivers and limited in where they are able to go. Just waste of money...
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 10:13 PM   #344
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 17,955
Originally Posted by macdoc View Post
This is not an edge case ....this is simply poor judgement on a technical choice



https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1H337Q

Uber will be found liable

Thanks for that.... and agree entirely
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 10:14 PM   #345
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 22,781
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
But wouldn't you agree that the incremental hardening and fortification has actually worked quite well for cars? At least relatively. Air bags, anti lock brakes, seat belts, street lighting, car design, drunk driving laws, guard rails, licensing and registration, etc. None of them a silver bullet, but collectively have made driving much safer and these autonomous systems is just another incremental step in that direction, revolutionary in other terms, but just incremental and evolutionary in terms of the paradigm of the personal car with all its imperfections including less tangible ones like urban sprawl.
Indeed, the incremental hardening has worked very well in making cars safer, and has certainly been better than nothing. That's really what kicking the can down the road is. The problem is deferred but not solved.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 11:48 PM   #346
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,630
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Thanks for that.... and agree entirely
Of course it is an edge case. The algorithm normally does what it is supposed to. In an unusual set of circumstances it doesn't. That is the definition of an edge case. Uber may well have been negligent in allowing such an edge case to exist, or in not doing sufficient due diligence, but that doesn't make it not an edge case. What do people think edge case means?

Yes, Uber should be liable. It is an important precedent to set.

Sent from my Vodafone Smart ultra 6 using Tapatalk
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2018, 11:55 PM   #347
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,630
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post



That's just wrong on fundamental level. Also that'd mean effective ban from residential areas in my country.

Frankly, what is then point of AVs? No safer then human drivers and limited in where they are able to go. Just waste of money...
Humans aren't 100% safe and we allow them to drive in residential areas. Sometimes they even run people down deliberately. Self drive isn't 100% safe and isn't going to be 100% safe, though it will probably get to the point where is is safer than human drivers at some point. Being surprised by fatal accidents caused by self drive is not rational.

Sent from my Vodafone Smart ultra 6 using Tapatalk
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 12:10 AM   #348
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 22,999
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Of course it is an edge case. The algorithm normally does what it is supposed to. In an unusual set of circumstances it doesn't. That is the definition of an edge case. Uber may well have been negligent in allowing such an edge case to exist, or in not doing sufficient due diligence, but that doesn't make it not an edge case. What do people think edge case means?
Wiki:

"An edge case is a problem or situation that occurs only at an extreme (maximum or minimum) operating parameter ...
Non-trivial edge cases can result in the failure of an object that is being engineered. They may not have been foreseen during the design phase. And they may not have been thought possible during normal use of the object. For this reason, attempts to formalize good engineering standards often include information about edge cases"

My highlighting.

A person or animal wandering across the road is entirely foreseeable and should be manageable long before the car is tested in public.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 12:16 AM   #349
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 22,999
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Thanks for that.... and agree entirely
Yes, and Uber's action is pretty shocking.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 01:57 AM   #350
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,070
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
A person or animal wandering across the road is entirely foreseeable and should be manageable long before the car is tested in public.
But (unless they were different vehicles) we know that the Uber cars can handle those things. Otherwise they would be constantly failing and requiring intervention from the driver, which does not seem to be the case.

So there is something about this instance that makes it different. Hence an edge case, based on what was expected.

That does not mean that Uber isn't responsible (the above mentioned design decision to use only the single lidar seems key here). It means their decisions missed something.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 02:11 AM   #351
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,990
Originally Posted by macdoc View Post
This is not an edge case ....this is simply poor judgement on a technical choice
Even worse than that. It turns out the Volvos they use already come with collision avoidance as standard, which would have detected the pedestrian and stopped the car in time... except Uber disabled it to put in their own system.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

Maybe we should stop calling it an "autonomous vehicle" and start calling it an uber-ruined vehicle.
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 02:39 AM   #352
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Of course it is an edge case. The algorithm normally does what it is supposed to. In an unusual set of circumstances it doesn't. That is the definition of an edge case.
A human appearing in front of a car is not an edge case. It's pretty damned common.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 03:21 AM   #353
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,119
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
Even worse than that. It turns out the Volvos they use already come with collision avoidance as standard, which would have detected the pedestrian and stopped the car in time... except Uber disabled it to put in their own system.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

Maybe we should stop calling it an "autonomous vehicle" and start calling it an uber-ruined vehicle.
Sadly I suspect Uber's research is more to do with its share price and looking for a nice juicy buyout rather than getting autonomous cars working.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 03:34 AM   #354
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,070
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
A human appearing in front of a car is not an edge case. It's pretty damned common.
But (since the cars have been handling this for a while now) something about this is different, hence the use of the term "edge case".

The drivers do not seem to be needing to intervene every time a pedestrian appears.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 04:22 AM   #355
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,630
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
Even worse than that. It turns out the Volvos they use already come with collision avoidance as standard, which would have detected the pedestrian and stopped the car in time... except Uber disabled it to put in their own system.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

Maybe we should stop calling it an "autonomous vehicle" and start calling it an uber-ruined vehicle.
Is the Volvo system 100% effective? Why do we think it is? Tesla found it hard to build a system that detected obvious (to humans) obstacles 100% of the time without a huge amount of real world testing and killing someone, and Uber had a similar experience. Volvo don't need to be 100% effective in all cases, since no sane person relies on auto breaking. If Volvo have solved this problem, they've chosen to solve a very much harder problem than they needed to and are commercial lunatics for having failed to dominate self drive.

Sent from my Vodafone Smart ultra 6 using Tapatalk
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 04:23 AM   #356
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,630
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
But (since the cars have been handling this for a while now) something about this is different, hence the use of the term "edge case".

The drivers do not seem to be needing to intervene every time a pedestrian appears.
Yes.

Sent from my Vodafone Smart ultra 6 using Tapatalk
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 04:29 AM   #357
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
But (since the cars have been handling this for a while now) something about this is different, hence the use of the term "edge case".

The drivers do not seem to be needing to intervene every time a pedestrian appears.
In front of your moving car? You bet they are.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 04:47 AM   #358
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,865
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
Even worse than that. It turns out the Volvos they use already come with collision avoidance as standard, which would have detected the pedestrian and stopped the car in time... except Uber disabled it to put in their own system.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

Maybe we should stop calling it an "autonomous vehicle" and start calling it an uber-ruined vehicle.

Oh, dear.

That's very unfortunate.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the woman who was killed had no close family who could sue them. However, I suspect there are lawyers salivating at the prospect of finding someone, somewhere, that can be the victim, or class of victims, that are represented.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 05:13 AM   #359
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,070
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
In front of your moving car? You bet they are.
Not according to some previous information about how the testing was progressing.
Which is why this current event has come as something of a surprise.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2018, 05:17 AM   #360
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,070
From here:

"
The Uber employees who spend full-day shifts behind the wheel of the cars said that at night on Mill — when numerous people cross the street amid the restaurants and bars near Arizona State University — the cars are effective at anticipating jaywalkers.
"
and
"
The operators said in the desert area to the north, near the accident scene, the sensors often prompt the cars to stop before operators see pedestrians who are walking in the dark on the side of the road toward the path of the vehicle.
"

I think this link was posted earlier by someone.

Now, this could all be misinformation, but assuming it isn't then this event had something else going on...hence the use of edge case.

ETA: Or a newer version of the code where someone ********** up.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:25 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.