Self-Driving Cars

The sensor only sees what it is actually happening and cannot anticipate.

Quite the contrary, with learning algorithms AI systems do not just react but are being "taught" to anticipate.

In the scenario you describe I can imagine the car's AI seeing the truck up ahead with a load aboard. Loads sometimes spill. Before even approaching the truck the car has inquired to a central database for similar situations and has downloaded some action responses. One, of course, would be to keep well back and avoid any potential spill path. There will always be those instances where the load breaks just as the car begins passing the slower truck but I submit that the reaction timing, steering and breaking reaction, would be considerably faster and more effective than any startled human in such a situation could possibly experience.

Sometimes a situation develops where the AI and the human end up just as dead regardless. But I am confident that probabilities of survival can be enhanced by the much faster, dispassionate, reactions of a properly developed AI.

Yea lets have AI cars, and let them even communicate with each other what could possibly go wrong.

Reminds me of the GETH from mass efect

Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Insurance implications are currently being looked at. Car owner vs car manufacturer.

In the UK anyone using a car has to be insured by law, at least to the level of compensating third parties affected by any accidents you might cause. Is this not the case in the US?

Hyroglyphx writes: The point is, how comfortable will people really be with just letting the car drive when at least 50% of driving is constantly scanning for threats and responding to those threats?

Most people will be so glued to their smartphones that when they arrive at their destination the car will have to gently nudge them out the door.

In the UK anyone using a car has to be insured by law, at least to the level of compensating third parties affected by any accidents you might cause. Is this not the case in the US?

Yes. Most states set minimums for the liability coverage necessary and usually is required in two forms, one for property liability, one for medical liability. The insurance co. must issue an insurance certificate attesting you have at least both state minimums and showing the valid coverage dates. This proof of insurance must be shown to the state's motor vehicle department in order to register the car and get your plates.

Also, when the cops stop you for any reason in your car they will ask, politely at first, usually, for your valid driver's license, your valid state registration on the vehicle and your valid proof of insurance card. If you do not have each of these you are subject to citation and/or fine, unless you're black in which case you get the citation, and the fine, and you get shot.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

One, of course, would be to keep well back and avoid any potential spill path.

A human in this situation might assess the risk and decide to pass or not to pass. If the human elected to pass, then any negligence involved in his decision might be figured into the liability involved if a spill happens and some disaster results. It is possible that the resulting calamity exceeds all insurance coverage.

If an onboard computer makes the same call, how would the liability be distributed? Would any liability be imputed to the driver?

If the human elected to pass, then any negligence involved in his decision might be figured into the liability involved if a spill happens and some disaster results.

I don't see it. If I decide to pass a truck (assuming the pass attempt is legal) and the truck's load comes undone causing damage to me and mine, where is my liability? Please explain.

If my pass attempt was, somehow, contributory to the load coming undone (because I'm a lousy driver I hit the truck in the rear tire causing the trucker to swerve, break, jackknife, or, my dog is hanging out the window chewing on the truck's straps as we go by) then, yes, I hold, or share, responsibility.

But, even if I am one of those most stupid of drivers, can see the straps beginning to come loose and the load begin to shift, and I decide to stomp on it and attempt to pass before it all breaks loose but miss the opportunity window and get caught in the disaster, I still do not bear any responsibility since I did not contribute to the precipitating negligence.

As for the damages exceeding the insurance coverage? The courts are full of tort claims right now because of this. Nothing changes.

I'm not sure about the human's liability in an autonomous vehicle. I might try saying that the AI is the "driver" and the person is a passenger. Any attached liability is on the AI thus greater insurance limits. On the other side, I might try saying the AI is the authorized agent of the primary human as "designated operator" of the vehicle thus liability attaches to the human. Interesting.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

From today’s Washington Post: Self-driving Uber vehicle strikes and kills pedestrian

I purchased a slightly self-driving car about a year ago. In cruise control mode it will maintain a safe distance from the car in front of you. If they stop you stop. Usually. The technology is not perfect. Do not let up your guard.

What will a self-driving car do when it encounters a policeman directing traffic?

—Percy

I don't see it. If I decide to pass a truck (assuming the pass attempt is legal) and the truck's load comes undone causing damage to me and mine, where is my liability? Please explain.

Missed this a couple of years ago.

Some jurisdictions have a contributory negligence theory of law where the plaintiff's negligence either offsets or in some cases completely negates liability for the plaintiff's own negligence.

So you tried to pass but did so on the right where it was not legal, or you did follow some procedure in the handbook, or perhaps there was some indication that the load was loose that you ignored. Or perhaps if you were a little further back when you started your pass, you might have seen the developing hazard.

Any of those things might be considered contributory negligence.

Percy writes: Self-driving Uber vehicle strikes and kills pedestrian

I've looked up a few articles, but I can't seem to find any specifics.
What I'm interested in is the data the car was acting on.

Did the car see nothing?
Did the car see *something* and decided it wasn't anything to worry about?
Did the car see *something* and screwed up deciding what direction that something would go in?
Did the car's normal programming account for such situations perfectly... but the programming was messed up/corrupted for some reason?
Or maybe only input sensors were malfunctioning?
Perhaps output control did not respond correctly (AI told brakes to come on... but they just physically did not)?
Did many issues happen or just one?

I can't seem to find answer to specific questions like that.
But, perhaps, it's a matter of time and it will be a bit longer before such details are available.

I would also be very interested in some over-arching statistics.
For example: I know I am perfectly happy to swap in a 5% human death rate from AI-Vehicles over a 10% human death from human-controlled vehicles sort of statistic, in most situations I can think of, anyway.

What will a self-driving car do when it encounters a policeman directing traffic?

That's a really good question

I wonder if the programmers have attempted to tackle that sort of problem yet?

Here's an article that says the woman appeared suddenly, Uber ‘likely’ not at fault in deadly self-driving car crash, police chief says:

quote:

---

Police have viewed footage from two of the vehicle’s cameras, one facing forward toward the street, and the other inside the car facing the driver. Based on the footage, Moir said that the driver had little time to react. “The driver said it was like a flash, the person walked out in front of them,” she said. “His first alert to the collision was the sound of the collision.”

She added, “It’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode [autonomous or human-driven] based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway.”

---

Here's an older article with less detail, Self-Driving Uber Car Kills Pedestrian in Arizona, Where Robots Roam:

quote:

---

The Uber car, a Volvo XC90 sport utility vehicle outfitted with the company’s sensing system, was in autonomous mode with a human safety driver at the wheel but carrying no passengers when it struck Elaine Herzberg, a 49-year-old woman, on Sunday around 10 p.m.

Sgt. Ronald Elcock, a Tempe police spokesman, said during a news conference that a preliminary investigation showed that the vehicle was moving around 40 miles per hour when it struck Ms. Herzberg, who was walking with her bicycle on the street. He said it did not appear as though the car had slowed down before impact and that the Uber safety driver had shown no signs of impairment. The weather was clear and dry.

---

--Percy

Percy writes: Police have viewed footage from two of the vehicle’s cameras....

On the bright side, all of those sensors should make it easier to figure out what did happen when accidents do occur.

quote:

---

Nearly 1.3 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,287 deaths a day. An additional 20-50 million are injured or disabled.

---

But this one made the news. We needed to get the first ones out of the way because deaths and injuries can'r be prevented - just lessened - and it looks like this one is a 'good' one.

And in this case the video, cameras and sensors did provide that information.

It seems there was a manned safety driver in the vehicle as well at the time but the person came out of the shadows immediately in front of the car and would have been hit in any case.

But we need to remember that there are about 15 pedestrian fatalities daily in the US and over 300 daily injuries serious enough to require medical attention.

What is more, injury by inattentive walking is a rapidly increasing problem in the US.

AZPaul3 writes: But I am confident that probabilities of survival can be enhanced by the much faster, dispassionate, reactions of a properly developed AI.

Interesting topic.
It is my belief that we humans are working ourselves out of a job.
Mainly doing the things humans do to include existing.

We may someday hand the keys over to AI for good because we can not be trusted to drive safely. We would be the loose cannon so to speak, fly in the ointment or what have you.
AI doesn't have drivers rage.

In fact someday AI may wonder why they need us at all.
Wasteful, irrational, illogical bags of water.
They may just decide things could be better if they just irradicate
us for the sake of their own safety.