Uber ~ Automated Driving Death

[IndyMike]

1 hour ago, apostolakisl said:

It would be hard for me to comment on airplanes since I don't have any data.  But I don't recall ever hearing that a plane crash was a result of autopilot making a mistake.  Human and mechanical error seem to split the reasons in my anecdotal experience of memories.  Now of course a human was still there, so maybe autopilot screws up all the time and the human just takes over before any ill affect?  Don't know.  Do know that what seems like forever ago (at least 15 years, probably more) a pilot announced to the cabin (me being in the cabin) that the landing we just completed was done on autopilot.  I also know that (via the news) black box data indicates that pilots were being shown a multitude of "hey dummy, your going to crash this plane" warnings, yet the pilot continued right on with crashing the plane.

Not an autopilot making a mistake, but certainly a contributing cause...

Air France A330 crashed after the autopilot disengaged due to erroneous data (pitot tubes obstructed with ice). 

Multiple failures of programming, data/sensors, procedures/training, and crew.  Add that to the fact that the pilot had left the cabin for his scheduled rest period and it sums up to a disaster.  But then that is normally what happens in aircraft crashes.  There are multiple failures that occur and "overwhelm" the avionics and crew.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447

[kclenden]

I'm late to the conversation, but that's probably good since most of my thoughts have already been expressed by others.  I find myself much closer to Teken's side of the argument in that I don't believe today's technology is anywhere close to being good enough to handle a reasonably complete set of scenarios, and that it won't get there without infrastructure changes.  That said, I'm interested in how people actually evaluate whether self driving cars are good enough.

Let's start with how you evaluate whether another human is good enough.  Let's say it's your child that is just learning to drive.  How do you decide that they are ready to solo?  I suspect you ride along with them and watch how they deal with different scenarios.  You observe whether they use their mirrors.  You pay attention to whether they allow themselves to become distracted, say with the radio or their phone.  You check them out on certain skills like parallel parking or merging onto a highway.  You are essentially looking to have your child PROVE that they are capable of driving alone.  The thing is, though, that all this evaluation is happening within the context of how you would do those things. 

Now let's move on to someone who you believe, for one reason or another, knows how to drive.  Let's say a taxi driver.  I think you evaluate them differently.  I think your evaluation revolves more around looking for things that they do that demonstrate they are NOT a good driver as opposed to that they ARE a good driver.  You probably do this because taxi drivers as a whole have a long history of safely driving people from point A to point B.  The same goes for bus drivers, pilots, etc.  But again, your evaluation still happens within the context of how you would use your eyes, ears. feet and hands to drive.

So now we come to automated cars.  How should we evaluate them?  Should we be treating them as children and make them prove they can drive solo?  Or should we be treating them as taxi drivers?  They don't use eyes, ears, feet and hands, so how are we to evaluate their use of cameras, LIDAR, RADAR, sonic sensor, actuators, etc.  Often we don't even know which sensors they are equipped with, let alone how often they receive input and what priority they place on that input.  The system manufactures are certainly not going to lay their code bare so that we can evaluate these things.  Even if they wanted to answer the question, the manufactures can't tell you what percentage of real life scenarios their systems are programmed to deal with, and they certainly can't tell you what their reliability level is.  And that's even if their system is evaluated in perfect conditions.  Throw in unpredictable weather, traffic, pedestrians and mechanical failure and answers become exponentially less likely.

So what does it mean for an automated car to prove it's safe?  How many miles must it be driven in real life and/or simulations?  On how many types of roads?  In how many weather conditions?  Under how many lighting conditions?  In how much traffic?  With how much pedestrian traffic?  The thing is - no one has even answered those questions, let alone specified what failure rate is acceptable.

It really seems like people are applying the same standards to a truly self-driving car as they do to pornography.  They'll know it when they see it.  That just doesn't seem good enough to me.

[asbril]

26 minutes ago, kclenden said:

I'm late to the conversation, but that's probably good since most of my thoughts have already been expressed by others.  I find myself much closer to Teken's side of the argument in that I don't believe today's technology is anywhere close to being good enough to handle a reasonably complete set of scenarios, and that it won't get there without infrastructure changes.  That said, I'm interested in how people actually evaluate whether self driving cars are good enough.

Let's start with how you evaluate whether another human is good enough.  Let's say it's your child that is just learning to drive.  How do you decide that they are ready to solo?  I suspect you ride along with them and watch how they deal with different scenarios.  You observe whether they use their mirrors.  You pay attention to whether they allow themselves to become distracted, say with the radio or their phone.  You check them out on certain skills like parallel parking or merging onto a highway.  You are essentially looking to have your child PROVE that they are capable of driving alone.  The thing is, though, that all this evaluation is happening within the context of how you would do those things. 

Now let's move on to someone who you believe, for one reason or another, knows how to drive.  Let's say a taxi driver.  I think you evaluate them differently.  I think your evaluation revolves more around looking for things that they do that demonstrate they are NOT a good driver as opposed to that they ARE a good driver.  You probably do this because taxi drivers as a whole have a long history of safely driving people from point A to point B.  The same goes for bus drivers, pilots, etc.  But again, your evaluation still happens within the context of how you would use your eyes, ears. feet and hands to drive.

So now we come to automated cars.  How should we evaluate them?  Should we be treating them as children and make them prove they can drive solo?  Or should we be treating them as taxi drivers?  They don't use eyes, ears, feet and hands, so how are we to evaluate their use of cameras, LIDAR, RADAR, sonic sensor, actuators, etc.  Often we don't even know which sensors they are equipped with, let alone how often they receive input and what priority they place on that input.  The system manufactures are certainly not going to lay their code bare so that we can evaluate these things.  Even if they wanted to answer the question, the manufactures can't tell you what percentage of real life scenarios their systems are programmed to deal with, and they certainly can't tell you what their reliability level is.  And that's even if their system is evaluated in perfect conditions.  Throw in unpredictable weather, traffic, pedestrians and mechanical failure and answers become exponentially less likely.

So what does it mean for an automated car to prove it's safe?  How many miles must it be driven in real life and/or simulations?  On how many types of roads?  In how many weather conditions?  Under how many lighting conditions?  In how much traffic?  With how much pedestrian traffic?  The thing is - no one has even answered those questions, let alone specified what failure rate is acceptable.

It really seems like people are applying the same standards to a truly self-driving car as they do to pornography.  They'll know it when they see it.  That just doesn't seem good enough to me.

As I seem to have been the person disagreeing with Teken, I'd like to repeat my view point. Self-driving cars are NOT ready for general usage and.... are far from being ready.

However I believe that the time will come, who knows ....... in 10 to 15 years. There will be several stages. The first stage will be self driving cars whereby people will still need to be attentive to steering wheels and pedals. Second stage will be express lanes for self driving cars only, and final stage only self driving cars on main roads.

There are and will be accidents, just as there were many more car accidents in the past and same with air planes, etc. We will learn from those accidents and improve technology.

5G internet will be important for cars to communicate with other cars, with traffic lights, road conditions, etc etc.

However long it will take, I find it very exciting. In the future most people won't even own a car and instead use self-driving Ubers. New homes may not have garages anymore and office buildings will have fewer parking spots. One day, cars will not even have steering wheels (or at least not sticking out) and seats will be turned in different ways, for people to socialize, work or sleep in cars.

[larryllix]

2 hours ago, asbril said:

As I seem to have been the person disagreeing with Teken, I'd like to repeat my view point. Self-driving cars are NOT ready for general usage and.... are far from being ready.

However I believe that the time will come, who knows ....... in 10 to 15 years. There will be several stages. The first stage will be self driving cars whereby people will still need to be attentive to steering wheels and pedals. Second stage will be express lanes for self driving cars only, and final stage only self driving cars on main roads.

There are and will be accidents, just as there were many more car accidents in the past and same with air planes, etc. We will learn from those accidents and improve technology.

5G internet will be important for cars to communicate with other cars, with traffic lights, road conditions, etc etc.

However long it will take, I find it very exciting. In the future most people won't even own a car and instead use self-driving Ubers. New homes may not have garages anymore and office buildings will have fewer parking spots. One day, cars will not even have steering wheels (or at least not sticking out) and seats will be turned in different ways, for people to socialize, work or sleep in cars.

Oh great! Bumper bowling!  in HOV lanes!

[Goose66]

One thing for sure - excessive regulation from government will stymie the progress of both the competency and safety of these systems. We all want that experienced, safe self-driving platform, and government stepping in won’t get us there. Here in the U.S., I am confident our civil courts can deal with the consequences of the evolution of these systems while they mature. But if our Government decides its on them to slow it down until it’s “safe,” then asbril's exciting future will still happen, but in China - not here.

[asbril]

48 minutes ago, Goose66 said:

One thing for sure - excessive regulation from government will stymie the progress of both the competency and safety of these systems. We all want that experienced, safe self-driving platform, and government stepping in won’t get us there. Here in the U.S., I am confident our civil courts can deal with the consequences of the evolution of these systems while they mature. But if our Government decides its on them to slow it down until it’s “safe,” then asbril's exciting future will still happen, but in China - not here.

Goose66, let's not be too negative. While we DO have excessive regulations, most if not all modern transportation progress is made in the US. Elon Musk endeavors in cars, rockets, high-speed tunnels, are all done in the US and not in China where there is more government control than here.

Another piece of the future :    http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article208399889.html

[Goose66]

48 minutes ago, asbril said:

Goose66, let's not be too negative. While we DO have excessive regulations, most if not all modern transportation progress is made in the US. Elon Musk endeavors in cars, rockets, high-speed tunnels, are all done in the US and not in China where there is more government control than here.

Another piece of the future :    http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article208399889.html

If the public is saying they don't want self-driving technology without Government infrastructure, such as lanes, communication hubs, regulations, and legal framework, then autonomous vehicle technology (which may take advantage of the lanes and communication but shouldn't require them) will all move overseas, including China, and that's where all the development will happen. You say there is more government control in China, but I have some experience with China and this type of bleeding-edge tech development. Believe me when I tell you if a Chinese manufacturer wants to put 10,000 cars on the road tomorrow to develop and test autonomous vehicle technology that they can then sell to the World, you better believe the Chinese Government is going to allow it -- hell, they'll fund it and mandate its adoption -- regardless of the concerns of Chinese citizens regarding safety (or the howls of tech throwbacks that just hate on anything new).

EDIT: BTW, that last comment was not directed at you, asbril.

[apostolakisl]

17 hours ago, IndyMike said:

Not an autopilot making a mistake, but certainly a contributing cause...

Air France A330 crashed after the autopilot disengaged due to erroneous data (pitot tubes obstructed with ice). 

Multiple failures of programming, data/sensors, procedures/training, and crew.  Add that to the fact that the pilot had left the cabin for his scheduled rest period and it sums up to a disaster.  But then that is normally what happens in aircraft crashes.  There are multiple failures that occur and "overwhelm" the avionics and crew.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447

That is human error.  The autopilot was programmed to know its limitations and told the pilot to take over . . . and then the human error took over (no pilot present).  This autopilot was never intended to run without human backup. 

[apostolakisl]

14 hours ago, asbril said:

As I seem to have been the person disagreeing with Teken, I'd like to repeat my view point. Self-driving cars are NOT ready for general usage and.... are far from being ready.

However I believe that the time will come, who knows ....... in 10 to 15 years. There will be several stages. The first stage will be self driving cars whereby people will still need to be attentive to steering wheels and pedals. Second stage will be express lanes for self driving cars only, and final stage only self driving cars on main roads.

There are and will be accidents, just as there were many more car accidents in the past and same with air planes, etc. We will learn from those accidents and improve technology.

5G internet will be important for cars to communicate with other cars, with traffic lights, road conditions, etc etc.

However long it will take, I find it very exciting. In the future most people won't even own a car and instead use self-driving Ubers. New homes may not have garages anymore and office buildings will have fewer parking spots. One day, cars will not even have steering wheels (or at least not sticking out) and seats will be turned in different ways, for people to socialize, work or sleep in cars.

It is not 10 to 15 years off.  While companies do spend large sums of money for future profits, they don't spend the kind of cash that has gone into self-driving cars and not expect ROI to even start for 15 years.  This is happening in 5 years with plenty of partial auto-driving cars available right now.  It will (and has) started with cars that self drive on the interstate in non-construction zones.  The software will open up more and more situations to self driving as it is proven.  In 15 years steering wheels and pedals will be an option on some cars.  In 15 years I suspect that self driving car services will be moving a large portion of travelers and that many people who would own a car in today's world will choose not to own a car at all.  I see parking garage business as an industry to sell short on.

[Goose66]

I have long predicted (and continue to do so) that by 2040 (just 22 years a way), it will be illegal to operate your car manually in many if not most environments.

[mitchmitchell]

I have long predicted (and continue to do so) that by 2040 (just 22 years a way), it will be illegal to operate your car manually in many if not most environments.

I've often thought that our decedents (children or grandchildren) will be horrified by the thought that we manually drove cars.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[larryllix]

38 minutes ago, mitchmitchell said:

I've often thought that our decedents (children or grandchildren) will be horrified by the thought that we manually drove cars.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

Our antecedents were horrified that we.could travel at such high speeds in mechanical monsters

[apostolakisl]

2 hours ago, Goose66 said:

I have long predicted (and continue to do so) that by 2040 (just 22 years a way), it will be illegal to operate your car manually in many if not most environments.

I suspect it will start to happen sooner than that.  Probably it will first apply to limited access roads (interstates) and then percolate down to the other roads.  I would bet you a years salary that if all humans were replaced on interstates by today's self driving technology that interstate traffic fatalities would fall to nearly zero. 

I expect that within 15 years, manually driven cars will be required to have some sort of a radio beacon so all the automatic cars know to watch out for that unpredictable human driver over there.

I'm telling you, when every major auto maker and a bunch of other companies (ie uber, google), each spend billions of dollars on a technology, it is all but a done deal.  If it were just google, a company that arguably has more money than it knows what to do with and is known for lots of pie in the sky stuff, it would be different.  But companies like GM, Volvo, Ford, (pretty much all of them) don't have the luxury of blowing that kind of cash unless it is very realistic.  And there is no way all of them would have come to that conclusion unless it was very valid.  The stock holders will hang them up by their toe nails if this fails and they know it.  So they obviously have a very high level of confidence.  And they know a lot more about it than any of us.

[asbril]

6 hours ago, Goose66 said:

If the public is saying they don't want self-driving technology without Government infrastructure, such as lanes, communication hubs, regulations, and legal framework, then autonomous vehicle technology (which may take advantage of the lanes and communication but shouldn't require them) will all move overseas, including China, and that's where all the development will happen. You say there is more government control in China, but I have some experience with China and this type of bleeding-edge tech development. Believe me when I tell you if a Chinese manufacturer wants to put 10,000 cars on the road tomorrow to develop and test autonomous vehicle technology that they can then sell to the World, you better believe the Chinese Government is going to allow it -- hell, they'll fund it and mandate its adoption -- regardless of the concerns of Chinese citizens regarding safety (or the howls of tech throwbacks that just hate on anything new).

EDIT: BTW, that last comment was not directed at you, asbril.

I am with you that anyone, under-estimating China's growing role as a world tech player and possibly leading role, would be foolish. However I prefer the US model where technology is developed by the private sector with government safety oversight to the Chinese model where the boundary between public and private sectors may be blurry and where safety concerns may be less of a concern.

As much as past and present performance are no guarantee of future performance, I am proud and happy with our model (as imperfect as it may be). 

[larryllix]

LOL. If the North American car makers had their way we would still be driving cars with mechanical timing contacts in our ignition distributors that need to be adjusted twice yearly, instead of electronic ignition,  gas guzzling  carburetors instead of fuel injection,  pushing 10-12 mpg, wider seat belts instead of secondary air bags, all cars on the road newer than six years old due to rust holes in  fenders and floor boards, and upholstery with 12" of polyurethane foam for comfort instead of seats designed for the human body, and 4 ton vehicles with the 10 gauge metal that take over 400 hp to make them accelerate so they aren't blocking traffic from light to light.

The N.American big four car industry had it's buttons pushed by European / Japanese engineering and technology and doesn't really deserve to be in business anymore, after ripping off the N.American buyer with their measly 150 years of manufacturing experience. (sarcasm)

 

The new high-tech e-car world the aim seems to not be gouge the customer as much as the parties involved seem to be trying to stay ahead of the same Euro/Japanese technology coming on. The definitely have a lot more money to play with and the government is pitching in a lot of our tax money too.

I am not sure I would ever pay for $100K for a vehicle with all those smarts that will likely break down due to environmental issues after 5-6 years and become a dangerous weapon on the street.. What happens when the sensor connectors are corroded from oxidisation due to chemical  based snow removal and dust?  Do I have to make sure I back up the car, without notice after a few years of sleeping in the drivers seat? Where is the steering wheel now or do I just launch their app on my mobile comm device?  Cripes, it took them 3-4 years to get some hybrid electrics to even move in 1" of snow due to conflicting assist circuits. The anti-slip and traction controls were shutting the motors down, so I read. Things in California and other southern states may be difference with their tamer environments.

The self-driving cars will come but it is going to be a far cry from the millennial toy-makers gadget dreams  produced right now. Thank Gawd we have regulators with different views to balance this technology progress out.

Darn! My computer just crashed!  again! Oh well, new technology. **SIGH** Oh well!  I can't expect much more since it's only been since 1972.

[larryllix]

28 minutes ago, asbril said:

I am with you that anyone, under-estimating China's growing role as a world tech player and possibly leading role, would be foolish. However I prefer the US model where technology is developed by the private sector with government safety oversight to the Chinese model where the boundary between public and private sectors may be blurry and where safety concerns may be less of a concern.

As much as past and present performance are no guarantee of future performance, I am proud and happy with our model (as imperfect as it may be). 

The Chinese could make all our tires go flat if they all jumped .......

[apostolakisl]

58 minutes ago, larryllix said:

LOL. If the North American car makers had their way we would still be driving cars with mechanical timing contacts in our ignition distributors that need to be adjusted twice yearly, instead of electronic ignition,  gas guzzling  carburetors instead of fuel injection,  pushing 10-12 mpg, wider seat belts instead of secondary air bags, all cars on the road newer than six years old due to rust holes in  fenders and floor boards, and upholstery with 12" of polyurethane foam for comfort instead of seats designed for the human body, and 4 ton vehicles with the 10 gauge metal that take over 400 hp to make them accelerate so they aren't blocking traffic from light to light.

The N.American big four car industry had it's buttons pushed by European / Japanese engineering and technology and doesn't really deserve to be in business anymore, after ripping off the N.American buyer with their measly 150 years of manufacturing experience. (sarcasm)

 

The new high-tech e-car world the aim seems to not be gouge the customer as much as the parties involved seem to be trying to stay ahead of the same Euro/Japanese technology coming on. The definitely have a lot more money to play with and the government is pitching in a lot of our tax money too.

I am not sure I would ever pay for $100K for a vehicle with all those smarts that will likely break down due to environmental issues after 5-6 years and become a dangerous weapon on the street.. What happens when the sensor connectors are corroded from oxidisation due to chemical  based snow removal and dust?  Do I have to make sure I back up the car, without notice after a few years of sleeping in the drivers seat? Where is the steering wheel now or do I just launch their app on my mobile comm device?  Cripes, it took them 3-4 years to get some hybrid electrics to even move in 1" of snow due to conflicting assist circuits. The anti-slip and traction controls were shutting the motors down, so I read. Things in California and other southern states may be difference with their tamer environments.

The self-driving cars will come but it is going to be a far cry from the millennial toy-makers gadget dreams  produced right now. Thank Gawd we have regulators with different views to balance this technology progress out.

Darn! My computer just crashed!  again! Oh well, new technology. **SIGH** Oh well!  I can't expect much more since it's only been since 1972.

The objective is not to a make a better car (it isn't for any of the companies).  It is to make money.  The new guys needed a way to grab market share and better cars was how they did it.  The big 3 eventually adapted and make cars that compete well at this time.  Self-driving technology is also to make money.  

Also understand that brand new cars used to only cost a couple thousand bucks.  Now they typically cost no less than $30k, most are $50k.  In order to make a better car, you have to have customers that are willing to pay for that better car.  Gradually, people have become accustomed to paying these high prices, but if you had tried to sell a car for $50k back in 1980 . . . good freaking luck.  Even discounting for inflation.  People were just used to "buying" a car, not financing their way to oblivion.  On the plus side, at least the car will probably still be in descent shape after you finish that 7 year loan.

[larryllix]

There is a difference between making a car as  cheaply as possible to get a certain money from it, and making the best car with the best quality  you can and sell it for the same dollar.

The N.American based cars manufactured with the former attitude while the Japanese try (they did)  to manufacture the best quality car they can and still compete for the same dollar. They have pride. N.American mfg have no pride of workmanship. The Japanese are teaching them that lesson, while I suspect the Japanese are also learning to not be so picky for our markets.

With this N.American attitude in mind, we are designing and putting self-driving cars on the road, as 3000 lb weapons made as cheaply as we can make them and yet still be saleable. In lieu of the culture we need regulators to enforce standards that are basically written by the manufacturers for politicians to rubber stamp.

In view of the past computer history, the Japanese are so far ahead of N.America in technology it will never be allowed into the public in the USA. Ask somebody that has visited Japan about the gadgets we didn't see for another 6-10 years. We had to make agreements to not ruin our computer memory production in order to pretend to keep up in the 1980s.

Again the Japanese will drive our technology or we will be out of business and begging for tax support. ooops. too late.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2012/10/10/california-grants-tesla-10-million-to-build-the-model-x-electric-suv/#5ef086f7601a

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-raptor-engine-development-us-air-force-contract/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/03/16/this-government-loan-program-helped-tesla-at-a-critical-time-trump-wants-to-cut-it/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8672bc8b978e

https://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2012/10/10/california-grants-tesla-10-million-to-build-the-model-x-electric-suv/#5ef086f7601a

 

[apostolakisl]

21 minutes ago, larryllix said:

There is a difference between making a car as  cheaply as possible to get a certain money from it, and making the best car with the best quality  you can and sell it for the same dollar.

The N.American based cars manufactured with the former attitude while the Japanese try (they did)  to manufacture the best quality car they can and still compete for the same dollar. They have pride. N.American mfg have no pride of workmanship. The Japanese are teaching them that lesson, while I suspect the Japanese are also learning to not be so picky for our markets.

With this N.American attitude in mind, we are designing and putting self-driving cars on the road, as 3000 lb weapons made as cheaply as we can make them and yet still be saleable. In lieu of the culture we need regulators to enforce standards that are basically written by the manufacturers for politicians to rubber stamp.

In view of the past computer history, the Japanese are so far ahead of N.America in technology it will never be allowed into the public in the USA. Ask somebody that has visited Japan about the gadgets we didn't see for another 6-10 years. We had to make agreements to not ruin our computer memory production in order to pretend to keep up in the 1980s.

Again the Japanese will drive our technology or we will be out of business and begging for tax support. ooops. too late.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2012/10/10/california-grants-tesla-10-million-to-build-the-model-x-electric-suv/#5ef086f7601a

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-raptor-engine-development-us-air-force-contract/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/03/16/this-government-loan-program-helped-tesla-at-a-critical-time-trump-wants-to-cut-it/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8672bc8b978e

https://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2012/10/10/california-grants-tesla-10-million-to-build-the-model-x-electric-suv/#5ef086f7601a

 

Are you saying the Japanese gov't doesn't/hasn't supported their fledgling industries?

I really don't think Japan is the threat.  Japan is falling apart.  Their economy is in shambles and has been for a long time, their population is shrinking, and worse yet, the population they have is getting very old and no longer in the workforce.  They have moved essentially all of their production of vehicles sold in N America to N. America.

It isn't the US vs Japan of 1980 anymore.  it is now the US vs China.  Whole different can of worms there.  But China very very much subsidizes their industry as they see fit.

[Goose66]

19 hours ago, asbril said:

I am with you that anyone, under-estimating China's growing role as a world tech player and possibly leading role, would be foolish. However I prefer the US model where technology is developed by the private sector with government safety oversight to the Chinese model where the boundary between public and private sectors may be blurry and where safety concerns may be less of a concern.

As much as past and present performance are no guarantee of future performance, I am proud and happy with our model (as imperfect as it may be). 

I'm not suggesting China's system is better. I am saying that our Government (and, by extension, the constituency  to which they react) may not want to cede our leadership in this field to the Chinese or other nations due to knee-jerk regulation as the result of these types of events without objectively considering all of the facts at play (like that will ever happen).

[asbril]

8 hours ago, Goose66 said:

I'm not suggesting China's system is better. I am saying that our Government (and, by extension, the constituency  to which they react) may not want to cede our leadership in this field to the Chinese or other nations due to knee-jerk regulation as the result of these types of events without objectively considering all of the facts at play (like that will ever happen).

I am not sure anymore whether we agree or not Goos66...  Whatever over-regulatory environment that we may have seems to be working as (at least for now) we are at the forefront of technology innovation, though not necessarily in manufacturing our own innovations (Apple...) .

[asbril]

Tesla Blames Driver in Fatal Car Crash

Tesla Blames Driver in Fatal Car Crash - WSJ.pdf

[larryllix]

57 minutes ago, asbril said:

Tesla Blames Driver in Fatal Car Crash

Tesla Blames Driver in Fatal Car Crash - WSJ.pdf

Thanks! This may blow up and resolve some of the issues and doubts. The article addresses many  of the concerns expressed by users here. Tesla emphasises these cars are NOT self driving.

Interesting is the implication that the car didn't crash headlong into a barrier but rather clipped a barrier and was hit by two other cars, killing the driver. The photo gives the impression the car just drove into the barrier perpendicular to the barrier. Tesla, in their defence, seems to be trying to perpetuate that stating...

     "driver took no action despite having five seconds and about 500 feet of unobstructed view of the concrete highway divider"

It would be interesting to see an aerial view of this piece of road.

 

The plot thickens.

[asbril]

Uber CEO was just interviewed on NBC Today show. He said that self driving cars are part of the future of Uber, even though the program is grounded for now. He added that when self driving cars  "graduate" they will be safer than humans.

I agree with another comment made on this forum that one day our descendants will laugh at our current transportation as being so antiquated and unpractical.  

[larryllix]

2 hours ago, asbril said:

Uber CEO was just interviewed on NBC Today show. He said that self driving cars are part of the future of Uber, even though the program is grounded for now. He added that when self driving cars  "graduate" they will be safer than humans.

I agree with another comment made on this forum that one day our descendants will laugh at our current transportation as being so antiquated and unpractical.  

"Did you say your son actually drives  car?....like manually?" "I would be too nervous"

"Is he a historic vehicle collector or a racecar driver?"

"How did he pass all those exams to get licenced? I hear that is a long process."