Programmers Will Kill off Autonomous Vehicles

I suspect that a lot of software changes are driven by the need to give programmers work to do, the same way that detergent manufacturers churn out "New and Improved" products to give chemists something to do.

New software is made by cementing more modules onto existing programs, adding more features. As newer hardware becomes faster, the software has to be made more complicated in order for the program running time to remain approximately constant. (If you have old hardware, of course, you will have to invest in new hardware to maintain your former productivity, thus continuing the process.)

It all sounds like a "we know better than you" attitude.

Agreed - this will eventually crush it!!

I am sympathetic to your observations.. I certainly haven't needed most of the improvements to Windows and MS Office forced upon me during recent years. It just creates new user interfaces that rarely improve my productivity, resulting in just frustration of learning a new way of doing the same old thing.

and I "supervise" software engineers...

However, most of the "improvements" being made by my software engineers are ultimately due to the impossible/vague/ridiculous demands made by .. marketing departments or customers demanding contradictory or vaguely defined "features". Sometimes the changes are due to new standards for a given industry (industry 4.0).

Yes, many "creative types" like to fiddle around with things.. till they break. But much of what I see today is not due to this. Most engineers (hardware or software) are no longer given the time to explore (fiddle around).

Yes, autonomous cars require a great deal of new technology - hardware and software. But I wouldn't predict their failure due to software engineers.

There are a lot of people out there being called "software engineers", but the field is much smaller for those working to DO-178 and other tough software development/testing standards - standards that are required for Aerospace/Avionics/Military. These standards, which are now starting to be applied to the automotive industry, are not a panacea to poor software, but they are indicative of a much more disciplined environment.

If you take any commercial flight, you are trusting these standards with your life.

https://dornerworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/64_Crots_Kevin.pdf

Have any of you guys actually tried to fix a modern motor vehicle even with relatively simple electronic control systems after say 10 years? My son manged to get a 1997 Range Rover Cheap. Its was cheap for a good reason every now and then the fuel consumption would go from 15 litres /100km to 35 litres/100Km. The major problem was the fault was intermittant, even with my fancy diagnostic system it took four years to find this fault. Image a self driving car whose complexity will make this vehicle seem like simple toaster and never mind the huge increase of complexity of the software and on top of that software enginneers who like to fiddle and write software that shouts at you.

I am not saying a driverless car is impossible but my God we have a long way to go to make them reliable, day in day out ,working for many years. More complexity means more unreliability. You know what keeps me alive in driving ? its "FEAR" of getting mangled up, burnt to death or killing somelse. Some driver instructor once said that they should put a bayonet sticking out of the steering wheel. Actually when one considers the number of cars on the road everyday we humans dont do such a bad job.

You only mention the down side of "fiddling" with existing programs. The up side is they sometimes make the existing better. Continuous improvement, you know. The problem is the supervisors that permit the downside to happen. All projects need an experienced supervisor to approve or disapprove a change. For instance, when you see an obviously bad highway intersection design, don't blame the one that did it completely, the final responsibility is the one that approved it!

Are you implying that their fingerprints were also found on the MAX MCAS system?

Remember this?

The reason for all of the versions of a software program is MONEY."Get it to market-- NOW" ;"We will work out the bugs as they come up."

The hardware and software designs for the next 10 years are already on the drawing boards,but they will be dribbled out to get the maximum profit.

The military is usually at least 10 years ahead of the general public in hardware and software.

In days of old,one had to write tight code because of limited memory;no room for fluff or errors.It was tested and vetted thoroughly before release.

Now they have virtually unlimited memory and resources to work with,and they write sloppy code.

As the song goes"Give me 40 acres and I'll turn this rig around."

(Anyone can drive a big rig if given enough room).

Don't get me wrong,there are many very talented software engineers out there,and I could not do what they do.My knowledge is prehistoric and would be very slow by today's standards.

They are under tremendous pressure to get it out the door.

However,I do remember a whole manufacturing plant running very well on 16K of Core memory and a Drum Drive.

That sounds impossible now.

I don't think you are being singled out,I really do think there is something wrong on your end of the connection.

Could be a cookie blocking software or antivirus software causing the drop outs.

Could even the the DSLAM card with a bad channel that your line is on.

Use someone else's computer to log in and see if you get the same results.

Let us know how that works out.

Here is a link you may want to check out:

https://alanzeichick.com/2008/04/achtung-alles-lookenpeepers.html

I used to work on the KISS principle, which to us like minded types means Keep It Simple Stupid however to programmers it means Keep Installing Stuffed Software.

Which as we all know guarantees them a process of continuous involvement as they are IT, Indescribable Turkeys, Irritating Technicians.

As the scorpion said to the frog, “it’s in my nature”. It is inherent among programmers/coders to seek the “perfect” code. Problem is that the perfect code is a qualitative judgment and the use of the code is quantitative pragmatic. As they say, “never the twain shall meet”.

I think we could start with a perfect system and it will be bastardized by lawyers and politicians. The algorithm would be completely unbiased, but some group will be over-represented in say 'pedestrian deaths" not because they jump in front of the cars to make them stop, or to rob the driver, or don't wish to use a crosswalk, but because the car is "racist" or some other nonsense. So lawsuits will be filed against the car maker, they will determine that it is cheaper to appease the loudmouths by changing the programming than to fight them. So now they have to be programmed to kill more "fairly" and account for "systemic racism", so they will take out other ethnicities, to even it out, regardless of fault.

I guess one of my 'concerns' all along is some goofball - seeing an autonomous vehicle (just saw a commercial for a small pizza delivery vehicle) thinking it will be funny running it off the road.

Maybe damage to that vehicle, but having it hit another manned vehicle, pedestrian, house, etc.....

Self driving cars are not as much a worry as stupid driven cars.

I share your frustration with software. I would think feature competition drives a lot of it. But the fundamental reason is the change and evolution of hardware. Less power requirements, smaller size and faster cycles are in demand. Many more functions can be done. Which require new programming instructions. Sometimes is works backwards. New software tech can demand new hardware tech.

Which came first? The hardware or the software? That's where we are now. Hardware drives software for a while and then, software drives hardware for a while.

As a side note on autonomous cars. Why? We are just beginning to exploit acceleration and traction tuning with DSP control of electric carriages. Tuning of suspension and carriage will follow. And finally, at this level of control, you want to give it to some software?