3,614 karma · joined December 7, 2017
He enjoyed toying with the reps, almost agreeing to sign, then in the last moment suddenly asking a hard question. Watching them apply all their dirty tricks.
He and his wife would go out to such event once in a while and come back with stories to tell.
It first reached a full stop after hitting the pedestrian.
Only then the car decided to pull over and dragged the pedestrian, ending with it's wheel on the pedestrian.
This is reportedly what caused the major injuries.
Even when reporting was mandated, they twisted the definitions to make them meaningless.
Cruise cars spend 2-4% of the time under remote assistance, but Cruise reported one disengagement per 95,000 miles in their most recent DMV report.
BTW, just recently I needed to choose a CRC polynomial and discovered his work on that field as well.
Edit: removed a Cruise incident.
The details are not that imporant. The main point is that they were aware they were couldn't match human performance on kid safety yet still put their cars on the street. all while talking about the terrible toll of car crashes on children.
> Two months ago, Kyle Vogt, the chief executive of Cruise, choked up as he recounted how a driver had killed a 4-year-old girl in a stroller at a San Francisco intersection. “It barely made the news,” he said, pausing to collect himself. “Sorry. I get emotional.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/03/technology/cruise-general...
Looks like Cruise was well aware they are not even close to the average human driver when it comes to handling kids.
They didn't bother to tell us about that.
Transparency is sorely lacking in this sector.
Edit: looks like Cruise is not long for this world. Insiders seem to have lost faith and are starting to leak. I'd bet it simply cannot withstand any serious scrutiny into its safety levels, practices, and culture.
Human drivers are the status quo. Once you consistently show that self driving can do better there would be a point in discussing that.
The problem is that you can't because such technology simply does not exist. There is no perception technology that is reliable enough. There is no prediction technology that is reliable enough.
To me it is obvious that Cruise and Waymo (and their likes) simply cannot withstand any serious scrutiny.
> P.S: If the claim is that a one-time DMV driving test is enough, then that should be enough for autonomous cars as well (I'm not making that claim)
The DMV driving test is just one element. We also know how human develop and what skills they acquire and when.
We don't let them drive until they're 15-17 (depending on local laws) because they lack certain abilities earlier than that. For example, humans acquire object permanance at around 24 months.
The Cruise incident shows that Cruise vehicles lack object permanance. They should not be elegible even for a DMV appointment.
How about we start with something simpler: have Waymo, Cruise and their likes produce a rigorous safety case[1] arguing why their vehicles are safe.
Once the safety case is in the open, we can also evaluate how well their system satisfy the claims in the safety case, and if the assumption do not hold, we can stop the experiment.
They are experimenting on humans. The usual requirement is informed consent.
Because it's not that everyone ignores road fatalities, it's just that cruise hasn't driven (in terms of miles amd conditions) nowhere near to what might result in a fatality with human drivers.
Even then, in an incident they've not initiated, they've unnecessariliy made an existing bad situation far far worse.
> (i.e. we have no idea how safe Cruise would be if there were no human drivers on the road)
Self-driving cars have to exist in a world with human drivers, pedestrians, and the rest of reality. No one cares how well Cruise does in a sterile environment.
They should not only not cause incidents, they should also not make existing incidents far worse because of terrible decisions.
Cruise barely drove a few million miles with new modern cars, good weather, the ability to choose optimal roads and weather, and yet it already severely injured a pedestrian.
We can argue about Cruise hitting the pedestrian, but reportedly, the major injuries were caused by Cruise, after reaching a complete stop, deciding it has to clear the road, and dragging the screaming pedestrian and ending with the axle over the pedestrian.
That's only the operation staff.
https://www.wemos.cc/en/latest/index.html
But the specific board from the post can be bought on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/CANADUINO-WEMOS-Minikit-240MHz-Blueto...
The DMV was not aware of that until notified by another government agency that was investigating the incident.
Why is anyone paying attention to it?
In their original press release they didn't even mention dragging the pedestrian. Here they've only mentioned it because they were caught red handed by the DMV.
Probably because you're reading their press release. Their previous press release was even more convincing - they somehow forgot to mention the part about draggin the pedestrian at the time.
Here they somehow forget to mention the car has already accellerated to 18mph while a pedestrian was still crossing the road.
"Whataboutism" is just pointing out you're applying a double standard. A rhetorical tool used since time immemorial.
Excess of anything is harmful by definition (otherwise it is not in excess).
The only question is how much is too much.
No fiber and no phytonutrients. The supposed benefits of both are basically hypotheses with really crappy observational data to support them.
Sucrose is effectively 50% fructose.
And the supposed benefits of fruits are pretty much non-existent.