Reply to: The "How did the accident happen" box on insurance forms

[greenlake]

The "How did the accident happen" box on insurance forms

[Hobosapien]

...How would you program something that "thinks" so fast that it can decide the safe course of action whilst there are other things moving at the same time?
... I can't see any computer ever being able to calculate all the different scenarios and take the appropriate action whilst hurting no-one. Not ever.
...

I dunno. If we presume computers can operate on the sort of awareness plane we see birds and other 'fast as fook' creatures then there's a chance they can take evasive action way before us slow humans even react to the threat.

The phenomenon where 'time slows right down' when a person's life is in immediate danger is an example of how we humans are half asleep most of the time. Just needs the AI systems to be fully awake and good enough to anticipate and auto-correct. So a lot better than the crap in that Uber death trap.

[Lost It]

There's been various threads on other forums about these cars being "programmed" to protect the occupants rather than what's outside, the "swerve into a tree and kill the occupant or run over the pedestrian" scenario has so many different outcomes and choices that this is something that will be THE challenge for years I imagine. How would you program something that "thinks" so fast that it can decide the safe course of action whilst there are other things moving at the same time?

And then operate the controls? And then start moving again whilst the passenger pulls his face off the dashboard and away from the SRS system after the car has just done a 1g stop and swerve to miss something...

It's not like a rugby player being aware of other players trying to tackle them, and avoiding the tackles without fending off whilst making a try scoring run is it? And that's a relatively simple thing that only requires a little bit of situational awareness.

Computers aren't good enough (and probably never will be) to work out the complex calculations needed to miss everything and stop safely as well. Frankly if you wanted a "driverless car" having something on an open road is definitely the wrong place to start.

What is needed is tram system where no "humans" can get in the way. Because human nature being what it is, I can't see any computer ever being able to calculate all the different scenarios and take the appropriate action whilst hurting no-one. Not ever.

To be honest, a woman pushing a cycle across a road is a bloody large target... And the car didn't even attempt to avoid the collision. Was it "asleep at the wheel"? Was the "human aboard" faffing with the program at the time?
Or is the system simply too dumb? GIGO.

[ladymuck]

I've definitely been in an accident that was my fault. I reversed off my drive straight into a learner driver. That was one lesson she never forgot.

Here's a few thoughts:

If automated cars get so good .... will insurance prices fall?

If you killed someone, by accident, whilst "manually" driving a computer controlled car ( i.e. turned off the auto-pilot ) AND it could be proved that the computer would NOT have made that mistake would you be charged with manslaughter as you willfully choose a more dangerous option?

Will we all be able to get pissed and auto-drive home from the country pub?

I would say, if we go fully automated (isn't that level 5 or something?), such that the passenger/defunct driver has no control, then the provider of the car should cover the insurance. If the manufacturer won't insure against accident or injury then that means they're not confident in their car's ability to cope.

Then, yes, you can get ratfaced in the pub and be driven home. Just need to code in the post pub kebab and have a robot to drag you out of the car and tuck you into bed.

[Hobosapien]

Video here

https://www.azcentral.com/videos/new...rash/33161865/

The pedestrian does look pretty invisible, but should have been detected by lasers/radar?

Fooking killing machines at that speed with some moron behind the wheel not paying attention, too busy looking down at his phone I presume, hence the surprised look on his face just as he saw the victim getting killed.

Yes she was daft to try to cross the road there at night in what appears total darkness (I presume the vehicle had regular headlight so she should have spotted it like any other car), but humans are humans and such incidents will happen. Wonder what the outcome will be, her at fault, person behind the wheel at fault, car detection system at fault, or all three.

You would have though some sort of night assist sensor would ensure any object was visible to the detection system, so even though the victim was difficult for a human to spot no excuse for a supposed AI system.

Then again I wouldn't want to risk playing Frogger with such vehicles reliant on their sensors actually working and the computer being able to make sense of the myriad of circumstances that come into play with humans and roads.

Only truly safe way is to either way over engineer the system so they have multiple backup sensors and redundancy against failure, akin to modern aircraft, or use new technology to invisibly mark different type of objects for detecting safe/unsafe/human etc. Similar to the different colour cats eyes on roads so can identify lanes, laybys and turnoffs in dense fog.

Either way, it's going to get complicated and expensive. Not sure I'd fancy leasing/buying such a car if they have so many sensors it makes modern cars look simple and cheap/easy to fix. They may decide a few fatalities is a better price to pay than implementing a truly fit for purpose system. A speed limit on such vehicles to under 30mph so any accident is less likely to be fatal seems like a reasonable start, unless they are in places where there should be no humans or animals.

[mudskipper]

Video here

https://www.azcentral.com/videos/new...rash/33161865/

The pedestrian does look pretty invisible, but should have been detected by lasers/radar?

[tomtomagain]

And that explains why we should have all worked harder at school and become lawyers...

And why you should always reverse park...

[Mordac]

I've definitely been in an accident that was my fault. I reversed off my drive straight into a learner driver. That was one lesson she never forgot.

Here's a few thoughts:

If automated cars get so good .... will insurance prices fall?

If you killed someone, by accident, whilst "manually" driving a computer controlled car ( i.e. turned off the auto-pilot ) AND it could be proved that the computer would NOT have made that mistake would you be charged with manslaughter as you willfully choose a more dangerous option?

Will we all be able to get pissed and auto-drive home from the country pub?

And that explains why we should have all worked harder at school and become lawyers...

[tomtomagain]

Ever been in an accident that wasn't your fault? No, me neither, all my accidents have been my fault, but it's a lot fooking easier to sue an individual with an insurance policy than a computer backed by a corporation with a room full of lawyers. Btw, we already have automated cars, but we've been calling them "taxis" for about 100 years...

I've definitely been in an accident that was my fault. I reversed off my drive straight into a learner driver. That was one lesson she never forgot.

Here's a few thoughts:

If automated cars get so good .... will insurance prices fall?

If you killed someone, by accident, whilst "manually" driving a computer controlled car ( i.e. turned off the auto-pilot ) AND it could be proved that the computer would NOT have made that mistake would you be charged with manslaughter as you willfully choose a more dangerous option?

Will we all be able to get pissed and auto-drive home from the country pub?

[OwlHoot]

Cars kill large numbers of people every day. In the UK in 2016 there were 102 cyclists killed & 448 pedestrians out of a total of 1792 fatalities ( the numbers seriously injured is significantly higher ).

If anything else killed 5 people a day then there would be uproar.

The focus should not be on whether someone died because they were hit by a computer-controlled car, but whether automated cars are safer per mile than human-controlled cars.

Not sure it's all that relevant to the point you are making (which is very valid BTW) but before there were cars even horses and carts killed hundreds of people every year in the UK!

[Mordac]

Cars kill large numbers of people every day. In the UK in 2016 there were 102 cyclists killed & 448 pedestrians out of a total of 1792 fatalities ( the numbers seriously injured is significantly higher ).

If anything else killed 5 people a day then there would be uproar.

The focus should not be on whether someone died because they were hit by a computer-controlled car, but whether automated cars are safer per mile than human-controlled cars.

Ever been in an accident that wasn't your fault? No, me neither, all my accidents have been my fault, but it's a lot fooking easier to sue an individual with an insurance policy than a computer backed by a corporation with a room full of lawyers. Btw, we already have automated cars, but we've been calling them "taxis" for about 100 years...

[tomtomagain]

Cars kill large numbers of people every day. In the UK in 2016 there were 102 cyclists killed & 448 pedestrians out of a total of 1792 fatalities ( the numbers seriously injured is significantly higher ).

If anything else killed 5 people a day then there would be uproar.

The focus should not be on whether someone died because they were hit by a computer-controlled car, but whether automated cars are safer per mile than human-controlled cars.

[OwlHoot]

Now is a great opportunity for the UK to get a lead on autonomous car development and boost related employment, by announcing tax breaks and strictly limited liability in the event of prangs, by contrast with the ridiculously and hysterically vindictive and punitive US damages culture.

But of course the Government will be far too cowardly to contemplate anything like that.

[greenlake]

I'm betting this deal has just been killed stone-dead....

Uber may be enlisting more help as it battles Waymo and other rivals for self-driving car supremacy. The ride-hailing company is reportedly preparing to sell autonomous-driving systems to other companies, including Toyota, reports Nikkei Asian Review.

Uber And Toyota May Team Up On Self-Driving Cars - The Drive

[Hobosapien]

That what happens when a company run by morons beta tests their product in public.

Hope they get sued into bankruptcy as a warning to others going down the same road, badly, to stop taking short cuts.