Google's self-driving Lexus cuts off self-driving Audi
fortune.com
fortune.com
> Instead, she explained how this was a normal scenario, and the Delphi car performed admirably.
> "Our car did exactly what it was supposed to," she wrote. "Our car saw the Google car move into the same lane as our car was planning to move into, but upon detecting that the lane was no longer open it decided to terminate the move and wait until it was clear again."
Source: http://arstechnica.com/cars/2015/06/no-2-self-driving-cars-d...
> Courtney Hohne, a Google spokeswoman, e-mailed Ars: "The headline here is that two self-driving cars did what they were supposed to do in an ordinary everyday driving scenario."
There is also legitimate security concerns, bad data from bad actors, interference, weather issues, and so on. It is just better to depend on reliable data from sensors and design systems around them, than assuming perfect data from other cars (which might be flawed).
However at some point, I expect some kind of approval body that would vet an autonomous car comm, similar to GSM for example. This is also a situation where you don't want bad actors emitting in the wrong frequency band, at the wrong time, with the wrong power, etc..
Also, the over all design should exist in such a way that it doesn't rely on such car to car communication. For example, if a person is standing in the road, or a deer jumps into the lane, the car should be able to react accordingly.
Having a car-to-car protocol would be helpful for the average case, but since there are so many tricky edge cases, I suspect full autonomy being developed to its maximum potential may make it unnecessary.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/26/us-autos-selfdrivi...
This article is just a snippet of Reuters with nothing added and some stuff removed.
> A Delphi spokesperson emailed Fortune with the following statement: “During a demo drive of our automated vehicle, our expert used the interaction with the Google car as an example of the types of scenarios that the car can encounter in real-world driving. It was an anecdote of an interaction, not a ‘near miss’. Reuters completely misrepresented the facts.”
Simple. The same sort of accident investigation that we do now would take place, and the owner of the car that caused the accident would be liable.