Autonomous vehicles OK'ed in California.

[Zatnikitelman]

I sincerely hope the cars either have no wireless communications, or there's an air gap between those and any safety-critical systems.

 

[Andy44]

Tesla’s Autopilot is now better than humans at highway driving – Elon Musk press conference for the release of software v7.1.

Musk may be right, but I bet if you take one of his autonomous cars and stick a BMW badge and a Maryland license plate on it, it will suddenly become the most insufferable driver on the road.

Oh, and about wireless? These things are basically The Internet on Wheels.

 

[TachyonDriver]

stick a BMW badge and a Maryland license plate on it, it will suddenly become the most insufferable driver on the road.

Can't comment on Maryland, but I hear you regarding some Beemer drivers over here too!

 

[RGClark]

Tesla’s Autopilot is now better than humans at highway driving – Elon Musk press conference for the release of software v7.1.
http://electrek.co/2016/01/11/elon-musk-press-conference-v7-1-tesla-summon/

For the case when driving on city streets, how would it handle this scenario: a child darts out in front of the car. It could swerve to avoid him but that would take it into oncoming traffic. Say there are pedestrians on the sidewalk and no parked cars on the right so it can't swerve in that direction.

A human driver would probably just jam on the breaks. But a computer would be able to calculate, let's assume for this scenario, that the car could not stop in time. Let's assume your car and the car in the opposing lane aren't going terribly fast and though the cars would be damaged in the collision it likely would not be fatal. However, for the child the impact even though braked might be fatal. Should the computer be programmed to swerve into the oncoming car even though there is a chance, though smaller, this could also be a fatal accident?

Self-Driving Mercedes-Benzes Will Prioritize Occupant Safety over Pedestrians.
OCTOBER 7, 2016 AT 5:27 PM BY MICHAEL TAYLOR | ILLUSTRATION BY THE MANUFACTURER

The technology is new, but the moral conundrum isn’t: A self-driving car identifies a group of children running into the road. There is no time to stop. To swerve around them would drive the car into a speeding truck on one side or over a cliff on the other, bringing certain death to anybody inside.

To anyone pushing for a future for autonomous cars, this question has become the elephant in the room, argued over incessantly by lawyers, regulators, and ethicists; it has even been at the center of a human study by Science. Happy to have their names kept in the background of the life-or-death drama, most carmakers have let Google take the lead while making passing reference to ongoing research, investigations, or discussions.

But not Mercedes-Benz. Not anymore.

The world’s oldest carmaker no longer sees the problem, similar to the question from 1967 known as the Trolley Problem, as unanswerable. Rather than tying itself into moral and ethical knots in a crisis, Mercedes-Benz simply intends to program its self-driving cars to save the people inside the car. Every time.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/self-driving-mercedes-will-prioritize-occupant-safety-over-pedestrians/

Bob Clark

 

[Keatah]

I guess Tesla now has Autopilot 2.0, full autonomy, 8 cameras, 40x processing power upgrade.. All they need is regulatory approval.

Not sure if it's level 4 or 5, didn't read the whole press release.

 

[Urwumpe]

In Germany, Tesla got ordered by the regulatory office to rename the Autopilot feature here, as long as it is no autopilot.

The German car manufacturers have in the meantime already tested autonomous cars on the A9, but that is just Autobahn. Should take a while to make a Autopilot software that also works correct beyond the Autobahn. And Tesla would need to improve the rear looking sensors here, because in Germany, you can drive 300 km/h on the Autobahn and still have somebody faster tailgating you. :rofl:

 

[tl8]

I guess Tesla now has Autopilot 2.0, full autonomy, 8 cameras, 40x processing power upgrade.. All they need is regulatory approval.

Not sure if it's level 4 or 5, didn't read the whole press release.

All new Tesla cars will now have the required hardware for Level 5 control.

Software is still lacking so could be a few years for that to occur.

 

[Face]

Self-Driving Mercedes-Benzes Will Prioritize Occupant Safety over Pedestrians.

Reasonable in a cold, hard market-driven world. They will be sued, no matter who will die in the end of this dilemma. So since this aspect is a no-win scenario for the manufacturer, they chose to kill those who are not customers.

This way, the chance for them to survive such an accident in terms of "still in the market" is highest if you can plausibly convey the message "if you drive with us, we do everything to make you survive".

Ask yourself: if the company's message would instead be "if you drive with us, we will sacrifice you for the moral good of the others", will you still want to take seat in such a car?

I would not do it.

 

[Andy44]

Ask yourself: if the company's message would instead be "if you drive with us, we will sacrifice you for the moral good of the others", will you still want to take seat in such a car?

I would not do it.

Exactly.

Also, if the software prioritizes pedestrians over the car's occupants, then it would be pretty easy to kill someone by steeping in front of their car on the right stretch of road.

Where I live there are all manner of idiots crossing busy highways at night dressed in dark clothing.

 

[Longjap]

because in Germany, you can drive 300 km/h on the Autobahn

Please keep it that way dear neighbours. Cruising through Germany is very nice. I'm sorry about the Dutch Wohnwagen pilots though. :lol:

---------- Post added at 04:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:48 PM ----------

Anyway, it would be a great challenge to have autonomous vehicles driving along at 300+ kph on the Autobahn indeed.

 

[RGClark]

Reasonable in a cold, hard market-driven world. They will be sued, no matter who will die in the end of this dilemma. So since this aspect is a no-win scenario for the manufacturer, they chose to kill those who are not customers.
This way, the chance for them to survive such an accident in terms of "still in the market" is highest if you can plausibly convey the message "if you drive with us, we do everything to make you survive".
Ask yourself: if the company's message would instead be "if you drive with us, we will sacrifice you for the moral good of the others", will you still want to take seat in such a car?
I would not do it.

The scenario discussed in that Mercedes-Benz article is not the more likely one. A more likely scenario was the one I discussed on post #37. Since this will be on city streets with mandated slower speeds, the car having to swerve into oncoming traffic probably would not be fatal, especially if both cars are self-driving where the second car would also be able to apply breaking and swerve away.

Despite the assertion in the article that Mercedes wants to avoid the technical and ethical questions, I think they are unavoidable in the more realistic scenario of slower speeds on city streets.

Bob Clark

 

[Face]

The scenario discussed in that Mercedes-Benz article is not the more likely one. A more likely scenario was the one I discussed on post #37. Since this will be on city streets with mandated slower speeds, the car having to swerve into oncoming traffic probably would not be fatal, especially if both cars are self-driving where the second car would also be able to apply breaking and swerve away.

In your scenario, the car would even risk the life of yet another person, which wasn't involved to begin with: the driver of the car in the opposite direction. So the car in question not only is a risk to its own driver's life, but also to the oncoming traffic. If Mercedes opts for such a solution, sales will drop like a stone. If not due to people not wanting to be killed at first, then certainly as soon as all the lawsuits roll in. I strongly doubt that the company will take this route.

But hey, VW ed us good with the diesel-gate already, and continue to European customers by telling them to off if they want compensation for being victims of scam. So there is that tiny chance that even German companies are too stupid for their own good. :lol:

 

[RGClark]

In your scenario, the car would even risk the life of yet another person, which wasn't involved to begin with: the driver of the car in the opposite direction. So the car in question not only is a risk to its own driver's life, but also to the oncoming traffic. If Mercedes opts for such a solution, sales will drop like a stone. If not due to people not wanting to be killed at first, then certainly as soon as all the lawsuits roll in. I strongly doubt that the company will take this route.
But hey, VW ed us good with the diesel-gate already, and continue to European customers by telling them to off if they want compensation for being victims of scam. So there is that tiny chance that even German companies are too stupid for their own good. :lol:

I don't agree. Given the scenario of definite loss of life of a child and minimal chance of loss of life when both vehicles are both traveling 35 mph or less and both braking, I think most people would choose the case where the chance of loss of life is minimal.
You see on city streets the results where a car accidentally swerved into another car going in the opposite direction or cross direction all the time. If neither car is speeding, which would be the case with self-driving cars, such accidents are rarely fatal.

Bob Clark

 

[Face]

I don't agree.

Well, sure, but you are not in command of the Mercedes company, right? We'll see if the humanitarian or the market-driven way of thinking will come out as the one that creates facts on this matter .

 

[4throck]

If you have a save autonomous driving software, it should see pedestrians on the sidewalk, specially kids and just go slower, leaving safe space to brake.
Otherwise, it's worse that a human driver.

And what about this situation:

Cows and the road are very common around some parts ;-)

 

[Notebook]

White-line follower breed!

N.

 

[Longjap]

White-line follower breed!

N.

Might be a bug.

 

[Notebook]

Definitely a cow, its in colour so not a Friesian(old telly mender joke, black and white tellys
were so known)

N

 

[Longjap]

Definitely a cow, its in colour so not a Friesian(old telly mender joke, black and white tellys
were so known)

N

:lol: This scares me a bit. I might have to check my sensors. Evasive action is definitely needed with a cow.

I wonder who can be held accountable for these malfunctioning autonomous creatures.

 

[Notebook]

Local farmer I would say, obviously poor security on the gates. Unless they are very clever cows and can pick the locks. Tricky with hooves.

N.