575
submitted 2 years ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Safe Streets Rebel's protest comes after automatic vehicles were blamed for incidents including crashing into a bus and running over a dog. City officials in June said...

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works 179 points 2 years ago

Thousands of accidents a year from human drivers. I sleep

90 accidents a year from autonomous vehicles. Lazer eyes

[-] jtmetcalfe@lemmy.fmhy.ml 45 points 2 years ago

Using the public as Guinea pigs for corporate profits: priceless

[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 44 points 2 years ago

DARPA figures out how to safely drive cars using LIDAR. Musk asked for a self driving car. Engineers come back the LIDAR solution. Musk fires them, says if humans can drive with two eyes, then so can computers. Cameras are cheaper than LIDAR. Second group tries it with cameras, can't get it to work, asked why they can't use LIDAR. Second group of engineers is fired. Third group comes up with something that 'kind of works'. People die. Big companies avoid self driving altogether, even though we have a perfect solution with LIDAR, all because Musk wanted to save a buck and can't get out of the way of his engineers.

[-] Yendor@reddthat.com 15 points 2 years ago

I’ve worked on serious projects involving LiDAR. The LiDAR you need at these speeds and with this resolution cost almost as much as an Electric Car - it’s too expensive to reach wide adoption. But video processing with CNNs/RNNs has proven you can build the same level of data with cameras. You don’t even need binocular cameras now - if objects are moving you can generate binocular data by combining IMU data with time-series imagery.

As I understand it, Tesla’s delays aren’t related to image capture (which is where LiDAR could help). They’re related to trying to find universal actions to take against an almost infinite number of possible scenarios (mostly actions by human drivers).

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 32 points 2 years ago

When a for profit company is deciding how much time/energy/funds they want to invest in pedestrian safety, you get LOUD and you stay that way forever.

Your comment is blind to the reality we live in and the broken, out of touch people deciding if human lives are a businesses priority, and at what percentages, as these types of vehicles scale.

When humans get in an accident, there were choices/mistakes made, but there are things we can understand in certain situations and find closure often. When elon's failed experiment decapitates your grandmother by driving her under a semi and sheering off the top off the car, you'll probably never settle with that image as long as you live - and you'll see elon in the news each day being a tool and never seeing justice for that moment.

There's a difference with distinction in this conversation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] pickle_party247@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago

the real funny here is how the USA has the most lax driving test standards in the developed world resulting in crazy amounts of road traffic accidents and really high mortality rates, but instead of dealing with shitty driving at the source there's a billion dollar industry in autonomous driving.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 years ago

Did you read the article? The protests are in favour of affordable public transit, instead of using 'surveillance pods' as a way to build even MORE roads. The accidents are probably the least of their concerns, although still on the list

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

They stop for no reason, cause gridlocks that require a human to comd out to it and pilot it, they've run over fire hoses being used and don't always get out of the way for emergency service vehicles. Nice statistic though.

[-] Mudflap@lemm.ee 31 points 2 years ago

So are you talking about autonomous cars or...

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] lobut@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 years ago

I mean, there's probably millions of drivers performing more driving and less than that of autonomous vehicles.

I personally can't wait for autonomous vehicles to take over but the argument would be clearer with percentages and stuff.

[-] bighi@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

90 accidents a year is a LOT, if you stop to think that there are like only a few dozens of them out there, versus more than a hundred million human drivers.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] moss@lemmy.world 67 points 2 years ago

I live in the area and the streets are just clogged with these fucking autonomous cars. Traffic is slower, people end up having to swerve, it's just a constant persistent headache. If I had it my way, they'd all be off the streets and into the crusher

[-] dustojnikhummer@lemmy.world 89 points 2 years ago

Almost like public transit is better than self driving taxis

[-] howrar@lemmy.ca 16 points 2 years ago

Can we instead have self driving buses?

I'm envisioning a system where you tell it your location and where you want to go, then it automatically sets up a route for the bus that coincides with where most people want to go and tells you to get off when it's near your destination. This can work in conjunction with self driving taxis if no one else is going to your destination.

load more comments (21 replies)
[-] SCB@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago

Public transit is better, but self-driving taxis are absolutely coming to every city in this country, which is great if you live in a city like mine that has little to no public transport infrastructure.

Also, automated taxis can service more rural areas, which is the key driver of lack of public transport in many "commuter cities."

Luddites gonna Luddite, but this tech is coming, and it's coming to logistics and taxis first.

[-] dustojnikhummer@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yes, but SanFran ain't one of those. Taxis have the same problem cars do, which is size.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 48 points 2 years ago

City officials in June said there have been ninety incidents involving Alphabet's Waymo and General Motors' Cruise vehicles since January.

Compared to how many traffic incidents involving human-operated vehicles? Because if that number is greater than 90, the AVs are the safer choice.

Automated cars don't have to be perfect; they just have to be better than people.

[-] Shazbot@lemmy.world 40 points 2 years ago

Bay Area native here. They're also prone to dead stopping in the middle of the street and other moving violations, blocking emergency services and public transit in addition to normal traffic. Ideally, we'd like these vehicles to be held accountable for these violations like normal drivers: fines, suspensions, impounds. But we'll settle for a human driver on standby who can immediately override the software when a moving violation occurs.

[-] wimpysocks@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago

Compared to how many traffic incidents involving human-operated vehicles? Because if that number is greater than 90, the AVs are the safer choice.

Well that is simply flawed logic. How many autonomous cars are there compared to human-operated? Far far more.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

How many autonomous cars are there compared to human-operated? Far far more.

I think you meant less.

Ideally, you'd be correct and we should be looking at per capita incidents- like how many incidents per 100 miles on the road or something. But the article just cited a flat number of incidents without contextualizing, which as you've pointed out can be misleading. Without knowing the ratio of AVs to human-driven vehicles, the best rebuttal that could be offered is "Yeah, but how do those 90 incidents compare to how people drive?"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Chipthemonk@lemmy.fmhy.ml 42 points 2 years ago

The interviewed protesters sound a little whacky. Maybe the cars are doing surveillance with the police, but that idea seems far fetched and unrealistic. Maybe I’m wrong.

I agree with more public transportation, bikes, and so forth, but I also agree with self driving cars. I dream of a future in which all cars are driven automatically without human drivers. Humans are very fallible and we all know, in almost every city, how many shitty drivers there are. Autonomous vehicles could fix this.

[-] firadin@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago

Maybe the cars are doing surveillance with the police, but that idea seems far fetched and unrealistic

I'm sure that's what people said about Ring, or Facebook messages being used to arrest women for abortions. Why would a company turn down an extra revenue stream (or subpoena)?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FluffyPotato@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago

Cars are incredibly inefficient at transporting people though, like you need a massive highway to transport the amount of people a train can transport, not to mention how much higher maintenance roads are compared to train tracks.

[-] lemmycolon@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago

Cars are incredibly inefficient at transporting groups of people long distances

FTFY

I'd love a legit train system to take me to locations across the state or country. But for running errands or local, day-to-day tasks, trains aren't the answer.

[-] tostiman@sh.itjust.works 26 points 2 years ago

Of course! For running errands and local, day-to-day tasks the bicycle is of course the best vehicle :)

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] alternative_igloo@lemmy.fmhy.ml 24 points 2 years ago

What exactly is the fear about self driving cars? I’ve never heard this side of the story.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago

There's a concern about more cameras recording all the time, and while I don't personally buy that argument (because being out in public means you don't have any expectation of privacy) I don't agree with these companies storing that data to give to police, effectively making Waymo or Cruise into private arms of law enforcement.

The reason that makes the most sense to me is it still encourages cities to be designed around cars, and not transit or people-oriented methods of travel. Even though they might make travel smoother by better decision-making than people, I'd still rather see more spaces devoted to foot traffic connected by buses or trains than the sprawl necessitated by personal vehicles.

[-] Entheon@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago

Some autonomous vehicles are not properly programmed to actually notice and properly avoid everything they should. For example, cyclists might be getting hit more by them.

I believe they are fighting to get the AI worked on more to actually avoid real obstacles.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
575 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

73567 readers
3104 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS