Tesla Model S, driving on 'autopilot' slams into parked police car (Laguna Beach)

I think self driving cars are going to take a bit longer then expected given all these hiccups(not literally hiccups but I mean accidents). I'm happy with my Lancia Thesis at the moment. My brain is fully in control of it.

Banana Bread wrote:

I think self driving cars are going to take a bit longer then expected given all these hiccups(not literally hiccups but I mean accidents). I'm happy with my Lancia Thesis at the moment. My brain is fully in control of it.

4 accidents in 2 years? Or how many is it? Every time a self driving car has an accident it's headline news. Meanwhile, human drivers crash into each other every minute or so. But the evil Mainstream Media just ignored this.

The term "accident" is already leading.

We should mandate dashcams for ALL cars (just like on police officers), and assess guilt in collisions. They are a big killer in many countries.

Currently, self-driving cars, including Teslas on autopilot, are running at a considerably higher accident rate than human driven cars per mile, despite being used primarily in excellent conditions and more on divided highways than elsewhere.

What the rates are can be biased by using self-driving cars more in lightly populated areas, not in the rain and snow, etc., as well as blaming human drivers every time there is an accident even if it should have been avoided by the driverless car.

See, people get all riled up bout the accidents, but Tesla is pretty clear when you can use it and when you can't. It clearly says that you should use it on well marked highways and not for any other area. This is misuse of the setting itself that is causing these accidents.

zxcvxcv wrote:

Currently, self-driving cars, including Teslas on autopilot, are running at a considerably higher accident rate than human driven cars per mile, despite being used primarily in excellent conditions and more on divided highways than elsewhere.

What the rates are can be biased by using self-driving cars more in lightly populated areas, not in the rain and snow, etc., as well as blaming human drivers every time there is an accident even if it should have been avoided by the driverless car.

please provide a reference

Banana Bread wrote:

I think self driving cars are going to take a bit longer then expected given all these hiccups(not literally hiccups but I mean accidents). I'm happy with my Lancia Thesis at the moment. My brain is fully in control of it.

Do you smoke cannabis? Text whilst driving? Change the cd player on the go? Rubberneck? Tailgate?

Self driving cars don't do any of those (ok maybe they can change the cd too but they don't need to avert their gaze from the road to do it).

I backed my car into a cop car the other day

Well, he just drove off - sometimes life's okay

Tesla's autopilot is not the same thing as "self-driving."

You still use CDs?

Still more reliable than humans wrote:

Banana Bread wrote:

I think self driving cars are going to take a bit longer then expected given all these hiccups(not literally hiccups but I mean accidents). I'm happy with my Lancia Thesis at the moment. My brain is fully in control of it.

4 accidents in 2 years? Or how many is it? Every time a self driving car has an accident it's headline news. Meanwhile, human drivers crash into each other every minute or so. But the evil Mainstream Media just ignored this.

Self driving cars absolutely need to be held to a higher standard than humans. My wife shouldn’t expect to accidentally die from her roomba because it missed a wall and cuts off her leg. I shouldn’t expect to die

from roving amazon drones decapitating me while delivering my neighbor’s packages.

Look, there is a clear legal precedent for humans behind the wheel. Intent and negligence is factored. If I screw up, jail and fines are a real consequence. Once computers make the decisions, the bar needs to be higher because it’s not like anyone gets resolve burying someone where the actor was a machine with no consequence.

there isn’t a precedent and this has to be worked out. Who is responsible? The driver? Or maybe the gps company, one of the thousands of programmers, the manufacturer, or maybe the subcontractors working on the optics? This is a mess and nothing is resolved. Just because the accident rate is “lower” isn’t good enough. We should all expect more if they are gonna shove this tech down our throats and profit from us.

Nope nope nope wrote:

Just because the accident rate is “lower” isn’t good enough. We should all expect more if they are gonna shove this tech down our throats and profit from us.

The government will provide the regulation, consumers will decide if they want to purchase the technology. No one is going to force you to drive an autonomous automobile.

I'm curious if you can define what "more" you expect. Does it need to be an accident rate as defined by accidents per miles driven? Does severity matter? Is any fatal crash a cause to ban the technology?

no YOURE hilarious wrote:

Nope nope nope wrote:

Just because the accident rate is “lower” isn’t good enough. We should all expect more if they are gonna shove this tech down our throats and profit from us.

The government will provide the regulation, consumers will decide if they want to purchase the technology. No one is going to force you to drive an autonomous automobile.

I'm curious if you can define what "more" you expect. Does it need to be an accident rate as defined by accidents per miles driven? Does severity matter? Is any fatal crash a cause to ban the technology?

Actually, it is being shoved down our throat. Once insurance companies haggle out the liability issue, what do you think is gonna happen to premiums on cars with humans as the main actor behind the wheel?

Also, while I can control my car right now, I have to trust you to follow the rules. Its imperfect but it works. There is no trust in a machine and no repercussions for breaking that trust. If it screws up, oh well, lesson learned. Another body bag and the programmers add another line of code buried someplace to fix it, maybe.

This tech will be ubiquitous not just in cars but in everything in the coming decades. We need demand now that the bar be set high. Machines will regularly be making decisions that chooses who dies and who lives in our future. I don’t want to relinquish the control until I know that the bar is as high as it can be and safety is first.

They can choose to either get it done, or get it done right. When it comes corporate history and increasing shareholder value, management will always choose the former over the latter. Think beyond this year and focus on your kids and grandkids. Demand a world better for them.

ModMouse wrote:

I backed my car into a cop car the other day

Well, he just drove off - sometimes life's okay

I ran my Tesla autopilot the wrong way.

The police said they're just glad that I'm ok.

And we'll all say AI's ok

And we'll all say AI's ok

And we'll all say AI's ok

We'll crash it all ourselves anyway.

Still more reliable than humans wrote:

Banana Bread wrote:

I think self driving cars are going to take a bit longer then expected given all these hiccups(not literally hiccups but I mean accidents). I'm happy with my Lancia Thesis at the moment. My brain is fully in control of it.

4 accidents in 2 years? Or how many is it? Every time a self driving car has an accident it's headline news. Meanwhile, human drivers crash into each other every minute or so. But the evil Mainstream Media just ignored this.

Someone should start a thread every time any car gets into an accident.

The companies who are making the self driving technology will be liable for massive law suits if their product causes harm to people. These companies have deep pockets, which will attract hoards of injury attorneys. If a negligent driver hurts you, chances are, you can't get too much in a lawsuit because the person isn't a millionaire. The same is not true for Tesla or Google. This will all work itself out. And the implementation of self driving cars is going to be very slow. The technological hurdles, as big as they are (albeit vastly underestimated), will not be the rate limiting step.

Nice thoughts but...

If you sue an individual, you are likely to get a big settlement because their insurance must pay. The tort system is already worked out and insurance settlements are more often expedited because there is tons of precedent.

If you sue google, you’ll be hip deep in the courts for years and after the appeals probably receive nothing after lawyer fees. They have big pockets and use them on great lawyers.

Next?

zxcvxcv wrote:

Currently, self-driving cars, including Teslas on autopilot, are running at a considerably higher accident rate than human driven cars per mile, despite being used primarily in excellent conditions and more on divided highways than elsewhere.

What the rates are can be biased by using self-driving cars more in lightly populated areas, not in the rain and snow, etc., as well as blaming human drivers every time there is an accident even if it should have been avoided by the driverless car.

I'd like a cite for that and I'd also like a cite for the accident rate when auto-pilot is being used as designed as opposed to cases where the manufacturer explicitly says it should not be used.

If only Pre literally had a self driving car.