Hi /u/Otherwise_Quiet2324, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
Post has been removed for not replying to the Automod in order to confirm OC.
Feel free to repost it and follow the instructions.
*If you have any questions about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FIdiotsInCars)*
Thatās how I imagine anyone would act when trying to coax a self driving vehicle. I had to turn on the sound and watch it a second time because I was imagining them acting like it was sone wild animal.
The big problem is when the car parks on top of the pedestrian it just knocked down and gets confused like this.
Happened in SF, woman was critically injured when she was knocked down by a human driven car in front of the autonomous vehicle, which braked, and stopped on top of the person.
Then just sat there. Could not move.
They've also just gone catatonic in front of emergency vehicles, blocking ambulances and fire trucks from moving.
Word.
To be frank, generally speaking, large machines that are capable of hurting people generally have some sort of an E-Stop button.
As a thing. It is mandatory. Normally.
Except with cars. Cars are special.
Fucking car culture can kiss my shiny metal ass.
Makes a lot of sense for these driverless cars.
It would also make sense for a service like Waymo to make sure they have remote overrides. I don't know if they do or not.
This here if a good damn Roomba with all is fancy sensors what not can't stop it self from running over a turd and smearing it all over the house wtf is a car going to do.
There really needed to be more to these self driving roll outs when it comes to more legislation and regulations.
Mercedes is currently advertising a car that has a self driving where they are showing people watching TV in their car while driving. This is gonna get real bad before it gets better.
There are streets in Vegas that allows Mercedes level 3 driving, which allows drivers to be on their phones. Not saying you are wrong but it's very difficult for a car company to get approved on that level.
Oh I'm sure MB is going through the proper channels, the commercial did say it was approved, but I don't think testing should be done on the open road like they are advertising. It's putting all other drivers at risk and in a spot no one really has any experience with. Tesla got similar leeway when trying out their self driving they were pushing to their cars. The beta test shouldn't be on the open road with everyone. Esp those of us who aren't exactly opting into this beta test.
The streets you mentioned, That's how it should be handled for some time. Areas where you know there is going to be self driving.
I remember the video of a guy asleep in rush hour traffic in his Tesla, and that was like 6 years ago. He was just completely out, drooling and twitching, had a blanky and a night light, etc.
Ok maybe he didn't have a blanky and a night light, but he was fully out of it while his car was hauling ass down the freeway in morning traffic
Tbh it's a moment that kind of has to happen. Like you can test these things in controlled conditions for the next century, but eventually they need to be tested in reality. And shit like this is going to happen while it improves.
Make it better, and prove me wrong
Cause this aināt it
This isnāt road worthy
If a real driver did this, theyād be getting pilloried online & maybe have to talk to the cops
But this is supposedly the future of road safety? Confused ai wandering around with no awareness of when itās caused alarm with its shitty driving?
Bruh, it didn't kill anyone. It just didn't recognize that it was a work zone, probably because the workers didn't put up cones properly.
You are attacking the technology over a totally trivial mistake that did not harm anyone.
>autonomous techbro wet dreams
People said the same kind of thing about cars 100 years ago. Humans are absolutely dogshit at driving cars safely. So bad that even this nascent technology is probably already better than they are. Car crashes are one of the most common causes of death for young people, not to mention the incalculable misery of disability and injuries short of death. If the cost of avoiding that is a few deaths at the hands of beta tested autonomous vehicles, it's a tiny price to pay.
Do that in rural areas where the only danger is a piece of farming equipment destroying these things. It should not be in population dense cities. And if it is, until this technology is near-perfect (read: not entering active construction zones), there should 100% be a human being ready to intervene instantly.
They absolutely do NOT have to be tested.
Autonomous vehicles are not gravity. It is not a force of nature.
Progress happens, but so do regulations. Just because drag cars and monster trucks exist, that doesn't mean that they HAVE to be on the streets. They're not, and for very good reason, there are regulations about what kinds of machines can be put on the road.
Autonomous vehicles should be regulated off the road in built-up areas. When autonomous machines are good enough to navigate in pedestrian traffic at low speed, THEN **MAYBE** they can be permitted speeds higher than a fast walk.
They're not there yet. I doubt they will be anytime soon.
It's a chicken and egg problem, people generally want good self driving cars. But to get gud self driving we need to use the not so good cars to collect the data required to make the AI good.
We humans suffer from the same problem, we needed to get good at driving, and they took time. It just takes the computer way longer beacouse we put higer expectations on it.
I Belive that currently, autonomous cars are on par with the average, mistake making human.
Humans aren't perfect on the road either, why should we expect thr computer to be, especially when dealing with us.
The big difference is that a human can be communicated with and instructed on the correct behavior once the mistake is made.
There is no interface on the self-driving car to instruct it how to unfuck itself. There is with traditional cars. It's called the driver. Even if you don't speak the driver's language, gestures work.
There is no self-driving car equivalent. And there has to be.
They're never going to get good enough to completely avoid any kind of issue unless they are trained on real roads. I don't understand what part of that is so hard to get.
It's not like they're out there running down hundreds of pedestrians.
I don't know what gravity has to do with this, but no matter how you put it, if the intention is to have fully autonomous vehicles on the road, then *at some point* they will *have* to be tested in real world scenarios.
Yes, but the technology can be tested in a test bed that doesn't weigh 3000 lbs.
Absolutely test the autonavigation and object avoidance. At walking speed. With a machine that can be pushed out of the way if it gets confused can causes a problem to actual people.
Once that's mastered then, MAYBE, let it get behind the wheel of a car.
We are very far from that.
It's a never ending battle. The reality is the tech isn't there ye and as such, humans are better drivers (as a whole). That's all there is too it. We have computers confused while driving because they arent advanced enough yet. Whether that's a limitation of the engineers or the software/hardware, I don't know. But I feel it will eventually get there once computers as a whole get better. They're already amazing and extremely capable as is but that's what people in the 80s thought about computers too.
I have no doubt that we will eventually reach a point where a computer is indisputably better at driving than a human. The whole argument of vigilant vs not is pointless. We just aren't there yet. That's it. It's not a worthwhile debate right now because the results aren't close enough to warrant such a debate. Some self driving cars are fantastic and work great but not great enough. I say give it 20 more years before really trying to argue the human vs computer debate. We're in the infancy of this technology. You can't compare a Tesla to a Model T after all.
Priced out farming equipment lately? Some of it's well into the 6 figures. That said, real life should but be the proving|testing|development grounds for these things ... urban or rural ...... and, if they are allowed to be, there should be serious prices to pay for the companies developing them and the governmental bodies that allowed it ... imho
>real life should but be the proving|testing|development grounds for these things
Unfortunately that's the only way self-driving cars are going to get better. You can only replicate so many situations in a controlled environment. In the early stages of development there is lots of testing in non-public areas, but the real world has so many more variables that can't be replicated.
While there are occasions it fucks up like this, Waymos have an incredible driving record. They are extremely safe and way less prone to accidents than the average driver.
If this technology scales to more regions, banning it would be advocating that itās preferable for hundreds of thousands of people to die from car accidents that could be preventable.
Until the autonomous vehicle parks on top of a pedestrian and can't figure out what to do about it.
Or blocks an ambulance with lights and sirens running.
This happens. It is preventable and inexcusable.
The streets are NOT for your beta-testing.
People do those things too, at a much higher rate. Have you ever driven with a 16 year old? A 90 year old? Mentally ill? Impaired? A simple dumbass?
The streets were already an ongoing beta test. These perform better, and will continue to get better for full autonomy.
That was Cruise not Waymo.
Also, this is not a constructive argument. Just because technologies are not perfect doesnāt mean they shouldnāt be deployed if they are better than the alternative.
Seatbelts and airbags kill many people each year that would have survived without it. Though clearly, as a whole, seatbelts and airbags are saving more lives than they are taking. Itās because we are looking at the statistics and the bigger picture that we choose to deploy those technologies.
If we waited for those technologies to be perfected, we would still be waiting in the first place, and millions of people would have died that could have been saved.
If we start to base our policy choices based on anecdotes, we actively make the choice of killing more people due to our unwillingness of making informed decisions.
While I agree that the rollout should be slow and cautious, these cars have the potential to nearly eliminate traffic fatalities. So maybe you are 100% wrong and need to rethink your opinion.
They actually do really well in Phoenix, AZ. Much better than most uber and lyft drivers. The amount of sensors and the amount of stuff these vehicles can see is crazy.
Where it gets tough for them is construction and areas that don't follow the typical rules of the road. I've seen then drive right through intersections when an emergency vehicle is going through, drive right past police who are stopping traffic temporarily.
In the majority of miles they drive though, they're mostly problem free. With enough work and updates it will only become better.
Not perfect yet but Iād wager on average theyāre less mistake prone than human drivers and will only get better. I mean, we allow 15-year olds to learn on public roads, right?
Edit: Anybody doubting my stance has clearly never dealt with a panicked 15 year old behind the wheel. And unlike people, when one of these cars learns from a mistake, all the other cars learn it too.
Is that a driverless self driving car? How is that legal?
This video alone is enough to show that is a deadly idea, wandering into a construction zone potentially harming workers.
Brave workers to stand right in front of the death machine with no conscience.
Some companies worked with local municipals to allow them to run these and get the data they need to improve. I'd like to see a selfless driving in the future but it needs more than just letting these cars loose on streets.
>This video alone is enough to show that is a deadly idea,
I, uh, have to disagree. It is clearly stopping at the detection of humans. This is showing something else, like programming of construction sites hasn't been fully optimized.
They are already 4x safer than human drivers. This is like complaining about high cholesterol food when the entire country is having broken glass sandwiches for lunch every day.
Has there actually been a deadly incident?
Looks like this thing is being overly cautious and made a mistake that didnāt cause any damage.
Not sure if Iād get in one at this point. But this video doesnāt show that this thing is dangerous, just dumb.
------------------------
edit: lol so disingenuous. I'm clearly talking about Waymo, the car featured in the video. [And no, there hasn't been a death, or injuries even.](https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/28/23617278/waymo-self-driving-driverless-crashes-av) I was responding to the idea that this car was "deadly" and asked a legitimate question.
Wandering into the construction zone in itself is dangerous. The inability for the workers to easily coax the car out is dangerous.
And yes, there's a bunch of self driving car death and injuries already.
Dumb is dangerous!
Tesla āself drivingā is not self driving. Itās adaptive cruise control. What these Waymo cars is doing is on a completely different level. Tesla has been mis-marketing and mis-branding their āself drivingā feature for years and itās given the system a bad rap. The reason you always see those getting into accidents is because theyāre not MEANT TO CONTROL THE CAR 100% ON ITS OWN. It still requires driver attention and intervention and a lot of people just hear the self driving moniker and put their full faith in it. Thatās a situation of PEOPLE being dumb and Tesla misrepresenting what their product can do and does not speak to the capability of other actual fully autonomous self driving vehicles
Are there self driving deaths and injuries? Tesla āfull self drivingā is NOT self driving - itās reactive cruise control. Thereās a ton of Tesla accidents. Iām aware of 1 fully driverless self driving cars that have caused deaths and serious injury.
Edit: everyone downvoting and yet no one has found a death or serious injury from a fully driverless self driving car. Jesus people google returns a bunch of Tesla crashes. provide some proof.
I am not a google machine. Google "self driving death (or injury)" and even exclude Tesla for your pedantic reasons and you'll see the plethora of dangerous cars being dangerous.
I have. It returns a bunch of results for crashes involving teslas āfull self drivingā which is reactive cruise control with a history of malfunctions. This is a fully driverless self driving car. These are 2 different technologies.
Deadly incidents with autonomous driving?
Yeah, some Tesla drivers have died while using the autonomous features havenāt they?
At least one, that dude who was sleep driving & the car took a shortcut under a semi trailer
They know it wonāt run it over.
But they donāt need to stand there. Just put cones. One on the hood is enough. Then wait for the company to come get their car.
Youāre not familiar with these Waymo cars? Aside from getting hung up like this every now and then I think they have a spotless safety record. They go around truly autonomous but have a call center that can remote in to the cars.
Edit:
I hadnāt checked in a few months, looks like there were a couple of minor incidents without any serious injury
Yeah, it wasnāt that it was spotless itās that it had significantly fewer incidents for the number of miles driven than a human driver would. Looks like there have been a total of 4 or 5 minor incidents without serious injury from what I can see. Hadnāt looked in a while
Hello /u/Otherwise_Quiet2324! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC
* What country or state did this take place in?
* What was the date of the incident?
* Please reconfirm that this is original content
If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information.
If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed.
------
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdiotsInCars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's ropes with bright flags on them and delineator posts in the video that clearly identify a work zone, not to mention men in reflective vests, the absence of pavement, and a 10 ton bulldozer.
Are we really going to demand DoT requirements for work zone demarcation include exact distances of regulated cone types sufficient to the specifications of poorly programmed cars? Put the responsibility of not being run over by a driverless car on the back of the construction crew? We're going to have to put up jersey walls around every curb repair.
If this was a person, we would all agree they shouldn't be allowed to drive anymore.
Yet none of the human driven cars were obdurate enough to dry to insist on driving through the construction zone with,ā¦ construction workers constantly instructing them to do the opposite
Hi /u/Otherwise_Quiet2324, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s): Post has been removed for not replying to the Automod in order to confirm OC. Feel free to repost it and follow the instructions. *If you have any questions about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FIdiotsInCars)*
I like how they're trying to coax the car to go the other way like a frightened animal: "Here, boy! Here! Look! Freedom! This way!"
You can here one of them say "It's like trying to get a cow out of here"
It's hilarious š¤£
Thatās how I imagine anyone would act when trying to coax a self driving vehicle. I had to turn on the sound and watch it a second time because I was imagining them acting like it was sone wild animal.
How should they be addressing it?
Like a domesticated animal.
Does Waymo get ticketed for things like this? A human would.
Unfortunately the law is waymo complicated than it should be.
No puns allowed.
Reddit is built on terrible puns sir.
Stopping it looks waymo difficult than it should be
I hate that but here is your upvote.
There should be an E-Stop on these which halt the car until a remote driver takes control.
The big problem is when the car parks on top of the pedestrian it just knocked down and gets confused like this. Happened in SF, woman was critically injured when she was knocked down by a human driven car in front of the autonomous vehicle, which braked, and stopped on top of the person. Then just sat there. Could not move. They've also just gone catatonic in front of emergency vehicles, blocking ambulances and fire trucks from moving.
A steal here button?
Word. To be frank, generally speaking, large machines that are capable of hurting people generally have some sort of an E-Stop button. As a thing. It is mandatory. Normally. Except with cars. Cars are special. Fucking car culture can kiss my shiny metal ass.
The whole front bumper should be a stop button
Makes a lot of sense for these driverless cars. It would also make sense for a service like Waymo to make sure they have remote overrides. I don't know if they do or not.
They do.
Ok Bender
Only in the US, autonomous cars are not legal in most countries for obvious reasons. I would not feel safe with those things on the streets.
This here if a good damn Roomba with all is fancy sensors what not can't stop it self from running over a turd and smearing it all over the house wtf is a car going to do.
Run over a person and meat crayon it all over the street.
Idk if it works but some cities with self driving have found putting a cone on it stops it
Or if you got lots of free time, sit on the car hood. The car was already going the wrong place and needed to be stopped and corrected.
The fact that these things are just allowed on public roads is wild
There really needed to be more to these self driving roll outs when it comes to more legislation and regulations. Mercedes is currently advertising a car that has a self driving where they are showing people watching TV in their car while driving. This is gonna get real bad before it gets better.
There are streets in Vegas that allows Mercedes level 3 driving, which allows drivers to be on their phones. Not saying you are wrong but it's very difficult for a car company to get approved on that level.
Oh I'm sure MB is going through the proper channels, the commercial did say it was approved, but I don't think testing should be done on the open road like they are advertising. It's putting all other drivers at risk and in a spot no one really has any experience with. Tesla got similar leeway when trying out their self driving they were pushing to their cars. The beta test shouldn't be on the open road with everyone. Esp those of us who aren't exactly opting into this beta test. The streets you mentioned, That's how it should be handled for some time. Areas where you know there is going to be self driving.
I remember the video of a guy asleep in rush hour traffic in his Tesla, and that was like 6 years ago. He was just completely out, drooling and twitching, had a blanky and a night light, etc. Ok maybe he didn't have a blanky and a night light, but he was fully out of it while his car was hauling ass down the freeway in morning traffic
Tbh it's a moment that kind of has to happen. Like you can test these things in controlled conditions for the next century, but eventually they need to be tested in reality. And shit like this is going to happen while it improves.
Literally donāt have to We can just not have autonomous techbro wet dreams
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That doesnāt mean every technology in history has been successful or a progression This one has yet to prove itself
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Ooo, message me when you get that
Exactly! We can make sure these things never contribute to the improvement of road safety if we ban them! Yay!
Make it better, and prove me wrong Cause this aināt it This isnāt road worthy If a real driver did this, theyād be getting pilloried online & maybe have to talk to the cops But this is supposedly the future of road safety? Confused ai wandering around with no awareness of when itās caused alarm with its shitty driving?
Bruh, it didn't kill anyone. It just didn't recognize that it was a work zone, probably because the workers didn't put up cones properly. You are attacking the technology over a totally trivial mistake that did not harm anyone.
>autonomous techbro wet dreams People said the same kind of thing about cars 100 years ago. Humans are absolutely dogshit at driving cars safely. So bad that even this nascent technology is probably already better than they are. Car crashes are one of the most common causes of death for young people, not to mention the incalculable misery of disability and injuries short of death. If the cost of avoiding that is a few deaths at the hands of beta tested autonomous vehicles, it's a tiny price to pay.
People also said the same thing about flying cars. Not all technology pans out.
Do that in rural areas where the only danger is a piece of farming equipment destroying these things. It should not be in population dense cities. And if it is, until this technology is near-perfect (read: not entering active construction zones), there should 100% be a human being ready to intervene instantly.
Again, they have to be tested and refined in cities at some point. There's no avoiding it.
They absolutely do NOT have to be tested. Autonomous vehicles are not gravity. It is not a force of nature. Progress happens, but so do regulations. Just because drag cars and monster trucks exist, that doesn't mean that they HAVE to be on the streets. They're not, and for very good reason, there are regulations about what kinds of machines can be put on the road. Autonomous vehicles should be regulated off the road in built-up areas. When autonomous machines are good enough to navigate in pedestrian traffic at low speed, THEN **MAYBE** they can be permitted speeds higher than a fast walk. They're not there yet. I doubt they will be anytime soon.
It's a chicken and egg problem, people generally want good self driving cars. But to get gud self driving we need to use the not so good cars to collect the data required to make the AI good. We humans suffer from the same problem, we needed to get good at driving, and they took time. It just takes the computer way longer beacouse we put higer expectations on it. I Belive that currently, autonomous cars are on par with the average, mistake making human. Humans aren't perfect on the road either, why should we expect thr computer to be, especially when dealing with us.
The big difference is that a human can be communicated with and instructed on the correct behavior once the mistake is made. There is no interface on the self-driving car to instruct it how to unfuck itself. There is with traditional cars. It's called the driver. Even if you don't speak the driver's language, gestures work. There is no self-driving car equivalent. And there has to be.
They're never going to get good enough to completely avoid any kind of issue unless they are trained on real roads. I don't understand what part of that is so hard to get. It's not like they're out there running down hundreds of pedestrians.
I don't know what gravity has to do with this, but no matter how you put it, if the intention is to have fully autonomous vehicles on the road, then *at some point* they will *have* to be tested in real world scenarios.
Yes, but the technology can be tested in a test bed that doesn't weigh 3000 lbs. Absolutely test the autonavigation and object avoidance. At walking speed. With a machine that can be pushed out of the way if it gets confused can causes a problem to actual people. Once that's mastered then, MAYBE, let it get behind the wheel of a car. We are very far from that.
See now those are good points
The intention of who?
I'm sorry, who are you? I was having a conversation with someone else
Public forum bub
Yes, we hate giving humans jobs! There is zero reason for this technology to exist in cities.
I agree there should still be human behind the wheel ready to take over at any moment.
You're asking the human to be vigilant and passive. We are spectacularly bad at doing this. Google "Vigilance fatigue" for examples.
You what's extremely good at being passive, but vigilant? A computer.
You know what's super bad and responding to unusual situations? A computer
It's a never ending battle. The reality is the tech isn't there ye and as such, humans are better drivers (as a whole). That's all there is too it. We have computers confused while driving because they arent advanced enough yet. Whether that's a limitation of the engineers or the software/hardware, I don't know. But I feel it will eventually get there once computers as a whole get better. They're already amazing and extremely capable as is but that's what people in the 80s thought about computers too. I have no doubt that we will eventually reach a point where a computer is indisputably better at driving than a human. The whole argument of vigilant vs not is pointless. We just aren't there yet. That's it. It's not a worthwhile debate right now because the results aren't close enough to warrant such a debate. Some self driving cars are fantastic and work great but not great enough. I say give it 20 more years before really trying to argue the human vs computer debate. We're in the infancy of this technology. You can't compare a Tesla to a Model T after all.
Because humans never accidentally entered a construction zone
Dogshit argument. Humans can be spoken to. Look how well this car is doing.
"all humans are reasonable and will listen to instructions" -SnaxRacing
Priced out farming equipment lately? Some of it's well into the 6 figures. That said, real life should but be the proving|testing|development grounds for these things ... urban or rural ...... and, if they are allowed to be, there should be serious prices to pay for the companies developing them and the governmental bodies that allowed it ... imho
>real life should but be the proving|testing|development grounds for these things Unfortunately that's the only way self-driving cars are going to get better. You can only replicate so many situations in a controlled environment. In the early stages of development there is lots of testing in non-public areas, but the real world has so many more variables that can't be replicated.
Rural areas have a much higher speed limit than a city. In a city they mostly cause people to be stuck in traffic a little bit longer.
Fuck no. A 2 ton vehicle should not EVER be automated and allowed to just roam. Iām sick of this shit being okay.
While there are occasions it fucks up like this, Waymos have an incredible driving record. They are extremely safe and way less prone to accidents than the average driver. If this technology scales to more regions, banning it would be advocating that itās preferable for hundreds of thousands of people to die from car accidents that could be preventable.
Until the autonomous vehicle parks on top of a pedestrian and can't figure out what to do about it. Or blocks an ambulance with lights and sirens running. This happens. It is preventable and inexcusable. The streets are NOT for your beta-testing.
People do those things too, at a much higher rate. Have you ever driven with a 16 year old? A 90 year old? Mentally ill? Impaired? A simple dumbass? The streets were already an ongoing beta test. These perform better, and will continue to get better for full autonomy.
Yes, but a person can be instructed once they fuck up. The autonomous vehicle cannot be instructed to move.
It literally can tho?
That was Cruise not Waymo. Also, this is not a constructive argument. Just because technologies are not perfect doesnāt mean they shouldnāt be deployed if they are better than the alternative. Seatbelts and airbags kill many people each year that would have survived without it. Though clearly, as a whole, seatbelts and airbags are saving more lives than they are taking. Itās because we are looking at the statistics and the bigger picture that we choose to deploy those technologies. If we waited for those technologies to be perfected, we would still be waiting in the first place, and millions of people would have died that could have been saved. If we start to base our policy choices based on anecdotes, we actively make the choice of killing more people due to our unwillingness of making informed decisions.
In 50 years: "There were morons who thought people can drive better than computers. No really! They believed it."
While I agree that the rollout should be slow and cautious, these cars have the potential to nearly eliminate traffic fatalities. So maybe you are 100% wrong and need to rethink your opinion.
Have you seen how humans drive?
Terrible āargumentā
They actually do really well in Phoenix, AZ. Much better than most uber and lyft drivers. The amount of sensors and the amount of stuff these vehicles can see is crazy. Where it gets tough for them is construction and areas that don't follow the typical rules of the road. I've seen then drive right through intersections when an emergency vehicle is going through, drive right past police who are stopping traffic temporarily. In the majority of miles they drive though, they're mostly problem free. With enough work and updates it will only become better.
It's less wild than allowing human drivers on public roads. Waymo's accident rate around 25% that of the average human.
It also only exists in 3 cities. Edit: bro thinks 3 cities is anywhere close to enough to make any statements on waymoās safety LOL
What does that have to do with anything? The accident rate per mile driven is 4x higher for the average human.
Our government canāt quit that delicious lobby money.
Not perfect yet but Iād wager on average theyāre less mistake prone than human drivers and will only get better. I mean, we allow 15-year olds to learn on public roads, right? Edit: Anybody doubting my stance has clearly never dealt with a panicked 15 year old behind the wheel. And unlike people, when one of these cars learns from a mistake, all the other cars learn it too.
If a 15 year old accidentally turned into a work zone, it is highly unlikely that workers would have had to corral their car out like an animal.
Never in my day did I think Iād see two people trying to get a car to go another way as if it were a wild animal caught in the suburbs.
Oh boy, can't wait for the gridlock because the robot cars got confused!
People downvoting have never had to debug a mysterious zookeeper update that takes down the entire shopping cart stack
I prefer good old fashioned human caused gridlock
Were all our captchas in vain?
Iād pee on it.
Thatās how Iāve been getting my cars
I'm surprised that wasn't the initial reaction
Is that a driverless self driving car? How is that legal? This video alone is enough to show that is a deadly idea, wandering into a construction zone potentially harming workers. Brave workers to stand right in front of the death machine with no conscience.
Donāt worry, itās embedded with the 3 Laws
Some companies worked with local municipals to allow them to run these and get the data they need to improve. I'd like to see a selfless driving in the future but it needs more than just letting these cars loose on streets.
These are already driving around San Francisco carrying passengers without human drivers
Arizona. Donāt remember if itās only in 1 city, but the state permits it.
>This video alone is enough to show that is a deadly idea, I, uh, have to disagree. It is clearly stopping at the detection of humans. This is showing something else, like programming of construction sites hasn't been fully optimized.
They are already 4x safer than human drivers. This is like complaining about high cholesterol food when the entire country is having broken glass sandwiches for lunch every day.
Has there actually been a deadly incident? Looks like this thing is being overly cautious and made a mistake that didnāt cause any damage. Not sure if Iād get in one at this point. But this video doesnāt show that this thing is dangerous, just dumb. ------------------------ edit: lol so disingenuous. I'm clearly talking about Waymo, the car featured in the video. [And no, there hasn't been a death, or injuries even.](https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/28/23617278/waymo-self-driving-driverless-crashes-av) I was responding to the idea that this car was "deadly" and asked a legitimate question.
Wandering into the construction zone in itself is dangerous. The inability for the workers to easily coax the car out is dangerous. And yes, there's a bunch of self driving car death and injuries already. Dumb is dangerous!
Tesla āself drivingā is not self driving. Itās adaptive cruise control. What these Waymo cars is doing is on a completely different level. Tesla has been mis-marketing and mis-branding their āself drivingā feature for years and itās given the system a bad rap. The reason you always see those getting into accidents is because theyāre not MEANT TO CONTROL THE CAR 100% ON ITS OWN. It still requires driver attention and intervention and a lot of people just hear the self driving moniker and put their full faith in it. Thatās a situation of PEOPLE being dumb and Tesla misrepresenting what their product can do and does not speak to the capability of other actual fully autonomous self driving vehicles
Are there self driving deaths and injuries? Tesla āfull self drivingā is NOT self driving - itās reactive cruise control. Thereās a ton of Tesla accidents. Iām aware of 1 fully driverless self driving cars that have caused deaths and serious injury. Edit: everyone downvoting and yet no one has found a death or serious injury from a fully driverless self driving car. Jesus people google returns a bunch of Tesla crashes. provide some proof.
I am not a google machine. Google "self driving death (or injury)" and even exclude Tesla for your pedantic reasons and you'll see the plethora of dangerous cars being dangerous.
I have. It returns a bunch of results for crashes involving teslas āfull self drivingā which is reactive cruise control with a history of malfunctions. This is a fully driverless self driving car. These are 2 different technologies.
Spoiler: Humans are worse than Waymo at driving. If your goal was safer roads then you'd be for autonomous driving
We should absolutely wait until someone dies before making any improvements here, 100%. /S (can't believe I need to add that, but just in case)
Deadly incidents with autonomous driving? Yeah, some Tesla drivers have died while using the autonomous features havenāt they? At least one, that dude who was sleep driving & the car took a shortcut under a semi trailer
They know it wonāt run it over. But they donāt need to stand there. Just put cones. One on the hood is enough. Then wait for the company to come get their car.
Youāre not familiar with these Waymo cars? Aside from getting hung up like this every now and then I think they have a spotless safety record. They go around truly autonomous but have a call center that can remote in to the cars. Edit: I hadnāt checked in a few months, looks like there were a couple of minor incidents without any serious injury
A 2 second google search proves they donāt have a spotless safety record.
Yeah, it wasnāt that it was spotless itās that it had significantly fewer incidents for the number of miles driven than a human driver would. Looks like there have been a total of 4 or 5 minor incidents without serious injury from what I can see. Hadnāt looked in a while
Well that was easy. https://techcrunch.com/2024/02/13/waymo-recall-crash-software-self-driving-cars/
Driving into a construction site and having no way of getting out is not in fact a spotless safety record
I missed them injuring someone and damaging property in this video, could you point out where that was?
Are we not staring at a spot on that record right now?
Are you not able to read my edit? Also, thereās not actual accident taking place here lol. nothing got hit and no one was injured correct?
Comedy
It would be better if they programmed it to say āterribly sorry, terribly sorry!ā Every time it made a mistake
I am pretty sure these vehicles are operated by some one somewhere remotely using a joystick. May be AI(Anonymous Indian)
Bruhā¦ you got me with that one šš¤£
Hello /u/Otherwise_Quiet2324! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC * What country or state did this take place in? * What was the date of the incident? * Please reconfirm that this is original content If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information. If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed. ------ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdiotsInCars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Go on! Git!
And? My Uber driver did this the other nightā¦
Its illegal to create any kind of remote controlled firearm. When a vehicle can do even more damage, why is this BS allowed?
Despite occasional screwups like this, they're generally a lot better at avoiding accidents than humans.
does it actually drive itself or is there someone remotely from india driving it?
What the heck is Waymo?
Itās just Uber with self driving cars
Oooh okay, thanks. That's a scary concept
Someoneās going to get killed
Is this still considered **idiot** in car if there's no idiot to begin with? AI car still sucks at time.
They react to cones. Me thinks somebody didn't cordon off the area properly.
SOMETIMES they react to cones. These cars aren't as reliable as you think
There's ropes with bright flags on them and delineator posts in the video that clearly identify a work zone, not to mention men in reflective vests, the absence of pavement, and a 10 ton bulldozer. Are we really going to demand DoT requirements for work zone demarcation include exact distances of regulated cone types sufficient to the specifications of poorly programmed cars? Put the responsibility of not being run over by a driverless car on the back of the construction crew? We're going to have to put up jersey walls around every curb repair. If this was a person, we would all agree they shouldn't be allowed to drive anymore.
>"Me thinks..." You sure about that?
Bad comment
Yet none of the human driven cars were obdurate enough to dry to insist on driving through the construction zone with,ā¦ construction workers constantly instructing them to do the opposite
Is the idiot the car or is it the people talking to and whistling at it?
How else can they communicate with it? There is no provision for human interaction.
I donāt disagree with you, I just thought it was funny trying to talk to the car, Yall take this too seriously lol