If the baseline includes all these sorts of human error, I see no issue with holding robots to a higher standard. Imagine if we rolled out robot policemen who only executed black people for no reason at the same rate as humans do.
The semi-permanent snow cover on many roads in 1/3 of the USA that lasts weeks if not months in duration. Humans driving on these snow covered roads form emergent lanes having little to do with absolute positioning or even relative positioning of the curb. They form lanes based on what other humans do.
Self-driving cars that depend on knowing absolutely where they are and relatively where they are simply don't and won't function. We need self-driving cars that can behave as a human will for that. And that is a long way off.
No autonomous car has shown it can handle these common situations. Until then self-driving cars should not be approved nationally and probably be restricted to the arid and warm states that do not have winter.
For context, the greater Toronto region is 6 million people, and Great Lakes region from here over to Chicago is multiples of that. Winter is 4-6 months. This is not an insignificant edge case for a small population, and if self-driving can't handle it, no thanks from this driver.
You're probably behind Tahoe in the line.
Just like you don't get Google Fi or Google Fibre. And just like some countries don't get YouTube Premium or whatever.
(As for Google Fibre, that's a fun one as I actually worked on that product, though of course I couldn't get it...)
Not to speak of the Chinese, who will simply build their cities to include road beacons or whatever is necessary to keep AVs effective.
Is this like not being invited to a party you didn't want to go to? Okay, then, maybe Tesla's snow driving test will give you the chance to ostentatiously decline.
https://medium.com/@hansdezwart/how-the-dude-was-duped-by-bi...
Unfortunately, troll behaviour or not, that's how SF companies behave in the real world. The usability of their products tend to be proportional to how close you are (physically or otherwise) to the bay area. I live in Calgary and I would be very surprised (and happy) if I see self-driving cars here before the end of the century.
Yes, freeways, highways, and major roads might have their curbs and markings restored to full visibility within a day or two. But most roads do not.
If it's just the autonomous system that doesn't work that's fine but now you really can't depend on the car unless there's a competent licensed driver who can take over.
I think we'll have versions like that for a long while before we arrive at autonomous vehicles that do not require a licensed driver at all.
Those people are fantastically wrong. And that's just one example.
I don't see humans going away for last 10 miles, that is delivery. Possible to make automatic, but there is an other layer of robots to be involved. And the environments like stores and private business in cities are much harder to design for this than hubs themselves.
This isn't a weather condition. It is a season condition. It's around an appreciable part of the year and human drivers drive in it.
I was able to find one that of the 37k driving deaths in 2016, 10-11k involved BAC over .08 and about the same involved speeding. Not knowing the overlap, 10-22k/30k is 27-59% of deaths involving drunk driving or speeding.
If it was on the high end of that, then to do better than speeding and/or drinking alone, you have to be at least 2.5x safer than human.
I wish there were better stats on the safety of the sort of driver you would let drive you around (e.g. you wouldn’t get in the car with your drunk friend behind the wheel).
It also potentially opens up policy options, or at least makes them easier to choose.
Here in New York, the roads are filled with elderly people like this. Mental acuity aside, they do not possess anywhere near the reflexes or dexterity to drive a car safely. Nonetheless, they are out there on the roads every day. It would be a trivial issue to implement basic physical and mental acuity tests that should be required in order to have a driver's license. Unfortunately this remains implausible because of the lack of an alternative means of transportation available to these elderly people (which could potentially be provided by self-driving vehicles).
> As I was leaving the supermarket I watched her struggle to open her car door before slowly getting into her car. I sat in my car for a few minutes watching as she struggled mightily to simply back her car out of her parking spot.
That is your cue to stay away from such drivers for your own safety. Just like if you see an idiot swerving on the freeway. Or if you hear loud honking and cars braking there is probably something going on. An AV would likely miss such cues unless it was specifically programmed to do so.
Human cops still have to do the killing for now, but that's called predictive policing
When I get into a car as a passenger today, I already get the benefit of riding with a better than average driver — I can identify and choose not to ride with people who are drunk, inattentive, reckless, etc. That’s the comparison that is a more reasonable baseline expectation.
I guess when the government contractors can profit off self-driving murders we will be good to go. /s