SERVING THE QUANTITATIVE FINANCE COMMUNITY

 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 20th, 2018, 9:36 am

not about this incident in particular, but in general, self-driving cars have had an accident rate considerably higher than human-driven cars, despite the fact that self-driving cars have tended not to be used in adverse weather which is precisely when humans have the most accidents (the point being that  if you compare like-with-like, you'd compare the human accident rate in fine weather with the self-driving accident rate in fine weather, with the self-driving rate way way way higher than than of the humans).
But it's been said that humans have been responsible for almost all of the accidents between self-driving cars and humans.
I've said it before, if a human driver had an accident rate 5 times higher than normal, even if none of those accidents were his (or her) fault, he (or she) would find it difficult (and prohibitively expensive) to get insurance. Yet when self-driving cars have an accident rate way way way higher than that of humans, people are just shrugging and saying that it's the stupid humans at fault. Even if they're not legally at fault, those self-driving cars are doing something to cause the accidents. Maybe they're violating unwritten rules of the road.
 
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 10024
Joined: July 20th, 2001, 3:28 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 20th, 2018, 11:54 am

Sad and, unfortunately, inevitable. It is notable that pedestrian accidents are generally way up lately and not due to AV's.

I would still like to see a TV show called the "Autonomous Vehicle Challenge" in which the show producers stage undisclosed challenges for some AV's and we see what happens. An obvious one is a somebody cluelessly crossing the street while texting. I'm not saying we know that's the scenario in Tempe, but it wouldn't surprise me. I could think of 100 others. I suspect everybody can think of some things that they have experienced driving that the AV software engineers haven't thought about or planned for. I also envision them working in a room in which a big "scenario to-do" list is posted and it has about 1000 entries on it, and growing  ....  
You confine testing of these vehicles to the neighbourhoods where the company directors and programmers send their children to school. 
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 22nd, 2018, 12:05 pm

 
User avatar
Alan
Posts: 9972
Joined: December 19th, 2001, 4:01 am
Location: California
Contact:

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 22nd, 2018, 6:36 pm

Here's the accident in another video where it's easy to step through the timing. It looks like there is about 2 seconds from the time the woman becomes visible to the moment of the crash. While an impact may have been unavoidable, it's very troubling that the self-driving system (not to mention the safety operator) didn't seem to react at all prior to the collision -- of course, we don't know that for sure. 

But, let's say there was indeed no reaction. Surely, the systems must be responsive enough to (potentially) react in 2 secs if an object is detected, even if the reaction still results in a collision. Some obvious possibilities: a) the poor lady was not seen by the lidar;  b) she was seen, but the system reaction time was too sluggish (software bloat?); c) she was seen, but misclassified as -- I don't know -- say, a piece of blowing debris in the road that the software decided was acceptable to hit; or?? I'm sure others can continue the list ...

The case c) poses some interesting issues because it is obvious from practical driving that often you see an object (like a blowing newspaper) and have to make a quick judgement that it is acceptable to hit it. In 10 years, when we all go shopping for our first AV, it puts the idea of taking the vehicle out for a test drive in a whole new light. Maybe everybody will wait for the proverbial dark and stormy night.
 
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 10024
Joined: July 20th, 2001, 3:28 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 22nd, 2018, 9:30 pm

People are drawing comparisons with the early days of trains. Total nonsense for obvious reasons.

I don’t know about the rules in the US but in the UK it is illegal to drive a car with tyres that are too worn. So it seems that all common sense has been thrown out of the window in this race into the future.
 
User avatar
ISayMoo
Posts: 2270
Joined: September 30th, 2015, 8:30 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 22nd, 2018, 11:00 pm

If the idea is that the "safety driver" is not meant to drive all the time but is still supposed to step in when something unusual happens, then this is a rotten idea invented by someone without any knowledge of how human brain works.
 
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 10024
Joined: July 20th, 2001, 3:28 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 23rd, 2018, 6:44 am

Yes! The video shows that pretty clearly. Looks like the "safety driver" was catching up on Instagram at the time.
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 23rd, 2018, 7:18 am

I have no doubt the "safety driver" is there because the authorities won't allow autonomous vehicles to be tested without them, even if they do nothing.

There was a story a while back that your car is programmed to kill you
We've discussed the trolley problem here before
There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person tied up on the side track. You have two options:

   Do nothing, and the trolley kills the five people on the main track.
   Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person.

Which is the most ethical choice?
in a variant of that, self-driving cars are  programmed to kill the occupants if the programming considers it the least bad thing to do.

Are we 100% sure this car didn't kill this woman on purpose because it decided it was the least bad thing to do?
 
User avatar
Traden4Alpha
Posts: 23951
Joined: September 20th, 2002, 8:30 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 25th, 2018, 12:40 am

That video is disturbing in the sense that the pedestrian is very clearly in the middle of the road for the entire duration of the car's approach but is unlit by the car's headlights until very late in the progression. It's not like she suddenly popped out into the street from behind some other object. Either the car's headlights seem pointed too low to provide required visibility or an upward curve of the road contributed to the victim being ill-lit. LIDAR should have seen her unless her blue jeans were dark in IR which is not impossible.

That accident should have been avoidable although crossing the street mid block at night while wearing dark clothing and having a bike with no lights or reflectors is evolutionarily maladaptive.
 
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 10024
Joined: July 20th, 2001, 3:28 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 25th, 2018, 7:11 am

It looks like there were street lights as well(?) But they didn't seem very effective.
 
User avatar
Traden4Alpha
Posts: 23951
Joined: September 20th, 2002, 8:30 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 25th, 2018, 9:32 am

That may be part of the reason that the cops think the accident was unavoidable -- a dark-clothed person picked the worst-lit section of an upward-curving part of the street to cross.

Even so the accident should have been avoidable by swerving. A 0.7G lateral maneuver a mere 0.7 seconds before the car crossed the path of the person would have moved the cars front right bumper some 6 feet to the left to clear the pedestrian.

(One of the key advantages of AV over human drivers is that they can be continuously monitoring lateral lanes for adjacent and over-taking traffic. That is, they do not have to take extra time to turn their heads to "check" if a lane change is safe. The car's side-facing and rear-facing sensors can run continuously with subsystems continuously tracking constraints on the car's maneuvering.)
 
User avatar
outrun
Posts: 4573
Joined: April 29th, 2016, 1:40 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 25th, 2018, 9:39 am

Uber self driving effort is a scam to inflate the company value. The Uber car needs a human intervention every 13 miles on average. The google cars once every 9000 miles.

If you think of it as a distribution then Uber has trouble with the simplest events, while google is in the tails events.

Uber knows this, yet there are fine with paying some girl a low wage to sit there and spend her time posting on Instagram. They will say it's her her fault.
 
User avatar
Traden4Alpha
Posts: 23951
Joined: September 20th, 2002, 8:30 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 25th, 2018, 10:28 am

Yes, it's clear that Uber's system is inferior to Google's. What's less clear is how rapidly they are improving the system. If each intervention results in a code upgrade that reduces future interventions by only 1%, they will exceed Google's performance in less that 3 million miles of driving plus a delay of some months for development. Given that Uber's prototype fleet is 16 cars, they could reach that level of performance in only a year of full-time driving.

As for the "safety driver" it seems Uber does not monitor their behavior. I'd have an obnoxious buzzer go off every time the driver looked down for more than 0.5 seconds.
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 29th, 2018, 5:53 am

As for the speeding ticket (fines, suspension of license, prison terms, etc.), those should be given to the programmers! 
I concur
Most jurisdictions have a rule that if you get too many tickets too close together, they suspend (or even revoke) your license. How does that work with self-driving cars? do they count each car separately or aggregate them and ground the entire fleet?

a self-driving car was just ticketed for failing to yield to a pedestrian at a crosswalk, and the cop seems to have issued the ticket to the safety driver, even though the software not the safety driver was the one driving at the time.

A self-driving car was slapped with a ticket after police said it got too close to a pedestrian on a San Francisco street.
The company claims the human test driver did everything right but is now responsible for the citation. San Francisco police did not immediately respond to a KPIX inquiry about the incident.
If the company (Cruise) thinks the safety driver did everything right, they need to step up and take responsibility for the ticket
 
User avatar
Traden4Alpha
Posts: 23951
Joined: September 20th, 2002, 8:30 pm

Re: Defend yourself against the coming robot rebellion

March 29th, 2018, 12:52 pm

As for the speeding ticket (fines, suspension of license, prison terms, etc.), those should be given to the programmers! 
I concur
Most jurisdictions have a rule that if you get too many tickets too close together, they suspend (or even revoke) your license. How does that work with self-driving cars? do they count each car separately or aggregate them and ground the entire fleet?

a self-driving car was just ticketed for failing to yield to a pedestrian at a crosswalk, and the cop seems to have issued the ticket to the safety driver, even though the software not the safety driver was the one driving at the time.

A self-driving car was slapped with a ticket after police said it got too close to a pedestrian on a San Francisco street.
The company claims the human test driver did everything right but is now responsible for the citation. San Francisco police did not immediately respond to a KPIX inquiry about the incident.
If the company (Cruise) thinks the safety driver did everything right, they need to step up and take responsibility for the ticket
Given that the safety driver is explicitly there to ensure the software does not cause accidents or violate traffic laws, the safety driver is the one who is liable. Admittedly, the safety driver concept is pretty asinine given that humans are terrible at monitoring something in which nothing happens except on rare occasions.

As for what happens when cars go full-auto, that's something for the clever lawyers to figure out. I'm sure they will come up with ways to encapsulate each car as it's own autonomous legal entity. Also saying that a fleet should be grounded if any of the cars collectively accumulate more than a few tickets is like saying all human drivers should be grounded is any human drivers collectively accumulate more than a few tickets. After all, humans share the same hardware & software which, if of unsafe design (the lack of eyes on the sides backs of our heads is surely a major design defect!) should lead all drivers of human design to be grounded.
ABOUT WILMOTT

PW by JB

Wilmott.com has been "Serving the Quantitative Finance Community" since 2001. Continued...


Twitter LinkedIn Instagram

JOBS BOARD

JOBS BOARD

Looking for a quant job, risk, algo trading,...? Browse jobs here...


GZIP: On