THE DEATH OF FULLY AUTONOMOUS CARS

A programmer writing a program to drive a car has to anticipate anything that might occur. This is a much more difficult task than a driver making decisions based on information available at the time. I am skeptical that "judgment" can be programmed for any possible situation, IMHO.

Flawless judgment cannot be programmed into people either. On second thought many people have significantly flawed judgment, that's why prisons exist. So why must autonomous vehicles always make "correct" judgments?

That's their claim to fame isn't it?

Otherwise, what's the point of the whole AV thing if it isn't to seek perfection?

You are evading my question by answering a different but similar question.

I agree that some think the point of autonomous vehicles is to program a flawless mass-produced item but not even six sigma manufacturing of passive products can achieve flawless production. My question is why people believe a flawless design is the only possble way AV can happen?

I'm sure within two years we will see AV on the road. Some municipal governments are taking initiative for implementing AV program in their territory. I think Trenton , New Jersey is one of them. Let us see, how it goes?

I found this in a Wiki article regarding autonomous ground vehicles:

“Autonomous control implies satisfactory performance under significant uncertainties in the environment, and the ability to compensate for system failures without external intervention.”

Well, okay... who gets to decide what satisfactory performance really is?

As noted in your Six Sigma reference, zero defect (ever) is unachievable in a controlled production environment; the infinitely variable operating envelope of a ground vehicle makes zero defect autonomous decisions/actions... less than unachievable.

[Yes, I still refer to Wiki sometimes]

"... less than unachievable." ?

English please, double negatives are obfuscations.

Does that mean "more than achievable" in plain English?

If so, your statement that "zero defect (ever) is unachievable" is contradictory to "... less than unachievable." isn't it?

My apologies for that, I will generally eschew obfuscations.

You are correct, in my conversational style I slipped a double negative in there, an attempt to express extreme certainty that a more complex and unpredictable operating environment reduces desirable results in any system.

What about the deer? Well what about the right front tire blowout during the unexpected deer encounter? Left front tire? What about the meteorite that impacts the car roof one second after the tire failure?

It sounds like we are of similar mind, level 5 autonomous cars are not a good thing to have running around. I personally seldom payride (Uber, taxi, etc.), and while I am sort of ‘gadgety’, I would not take a ride in an autonomous vehicle. However, an autonomous semi truck on an American freeway - as the tech matures this sort of thing may have some merit.

I was just confused by the double negative and I couldn't get my head around it.

Sorry about that.

I totally agree with you that programmable perfection in an uncontrolled environment such as we find on the roads is unachievable.

I don't see the point of feeling unsafe in a programmed car whose safety and maintenance I know nothing about, when I can feel one hundred per cent safe by driving myself in a regular car that I know is properly maintained.

Until there is a common system design, I don't see this ever working. The idea of replacing an inept human with something that takes sensor data in, and auto drives is foolery.

What's needed is a communication requirement that talks to some server hub in the driving area. This communicates what the destination is for each of the vehicles on the roadway. That way it's known when vehicles are entering and leaving the roadway, and can be accommodated. Yes this means there's no random driving with out keying in the destination before the vehicle ever leaves its current parking location.

There will be no steering wheel, no brake pedal, no throttle, it's the only way to make it safe, to take humans out of the loop.

But what about that deer?

"But what about that deer?"

Doesn't that answer your earlier question "So why must autonomous vehicles always make "correct" judgments?"

My question about a deer does not answer any question here. Rarely does a question answer another question. Questions attempt to stimulate thoughts in others. They are the fundamental principle of Socratic teaching but only when the student attempts to answer the question.

My question on autonomous driving judgment ponders why flawless decisions are required to approve autonomous driving. We do not require flawless decisions for people to drive. For people to be permitted to drive they must pass a written test on the rules of the road and demonstrate proficiency to navigate a vehicle within those rules of the road. Flawless performance during that driving test is common but not necessary, minor errors have still resulted in a driver's license.

A more stringent driving test for autonomous driver licensing does seem prudent but expecting driving perfection in perpetuity is delusional and unfairly discriminatory.

But this is not my point in asking the questions of a deer and flawless judgments. We have to accept autonomous driving accidents will happen. Hopefully, they will initially be less frequent than human driver accidents but I am confident they will eventually be less common than human drivers. Nonetheless, they will still happen.

Most got your point. But when it comes to vehicles, accidents is one side only of the story. Just divert from the current situation (that IS getting worse by the day and not because of a regional war) and "remember" cars was not just for transportation only. What about the American dream? Most people living in urban areas that are still still on it are just because of inertia. Don't believe it? You're missing the signs. S.M.

Death? No. A bit delayed untill open source catches up, and there's none to blame. S.M.

You seriously think that Tesla, Ford, GM, Mercedes VW etc are ever going to allow open source programming for their cars?