Cars for those who hate to drive

[Max Peck]

All Mercedes-Benz self-driving cars will be named Christine.

The technology is new, but the moral conundrum isn’t: A self-driving car identifies a group of children running into the road. There is no time to stop. To swerve around them would drive the car into a speeding truck on one side or over a cliff on the other, bringing certain death to anybody inside.

To anyone pushing for a future for autonomous cars, this question has become the elephant in the room, argued over incessantly by lawyers, regulators, and ethicists; it has even been at the center of a human study by Science. Happy to have their names kept in the background of the life-or-death drama, most carmakers have let Google take the lead while making passing reference to ongoing research, investigations, or discussions.

But not Mercedes-Benz. Not anymore.

The world’s oldest carmaker no longer sees the problem, similar to the question from 1967 known as the Trolley Problem, as unanswerable. Rather than tying itself into moral and ethical knots in a crisis, Mercedes-Benz simply intends to program its self-driving cars to save the people inside the car. Every time.

All of Mercedes-Benz’s future Level 4 and Level 5 autonomous cars will prioritize saving the people they carry, according to Christoph von Hugo, the automaker’s manager of driver assistance systems and active safety.

“If you know you can save at least one person, at least save that one. Save the one in the car,” Hugo said in an interview at the Paris auto show. “If all you know for sure is that one death can be prevented, then that’s your first priority.”

[Isgrimnur]

The Germans have a long track record of deciding who should live and who should die.

[Zenn7]

All Mercedes-Benz self-driving cars will be named Christine.

The technology is new, but the moral conundrum isn’t: A self-driving car identifies a group of children running into the road. There is no time to stop. To swerve around them would drive the car into a speeding truck on one side or over a cliff on the other, bringing certain death to anybody inside.

Exactly where did these kids come from??? There's a cliff on one side and a truck on the other. They just finish climbing a cliff that leads onto a road with apparently somewhat high speed traffic? (At a really low speed, would have time to stop given the kids would take a minute to get over the cliff and onto the road - sensors should be picking up on something on the edge of the road coming into the road and slow down). Did they run in front of the truck that didn't bother to slow down? Surely if they were just there walking down the road, the sensors would have detected them? It's a curve, on a mountain road and the sensors had no chance to see them?

OK at that point, walking on a windy road on a curve up a mountain with no place to get off the road and high speed moving traffic... maybe this is a viable scenario somewhere, but I have not driven in this location yet.

Not saying there couldn't be viable scenarios where there are issues (woods instead of a cliff for example makes some sense at least), but this particular example seems at best extremely implausible.

[Max Peck]

Do you like this example better?

One of the biggest debates about driverless cars concerns the moral choices made when programming a car's algorithms. Say the car is spinning out of control, and on course to hit a crowd queuing at a bus stop. It can correct its course, but in doing so, it'll kill a cyclist for sure. What does it do? Mercedes's answer to this take on the classic Trolley Problem is to hit whichever one is least likely to hurt the people inside its cars. If that means taking out a crowd of kids waiting for the bus, then so be it.

Or this one?

Imagine you're driving down a road with your friend in the front seat. A child suddenly chases a ball into the middle of road, and your only choices are to run the child over or to swerve into a tree, which could kill you and your passenger. What do you do?

It sounds like a test to determine someone's level of psychopathy, but it's actually a choice the developers of autonomous vehicles have been faced with since the idea first materialised.

In an interview published last week with Car and Driver, the manager of driver-assistance systems at Mercedes-Benz, Christoph von Hugo, revealed that the company's future autonomous vehicles would always put the driver first. In other words, in the above dilemma, they will be programmed to run over the child every time.

[Lordnine]

Has there been any publicly released tests dealing with how these cars operate in snowy/icy conditions? I’m definitely in the market for one of these when they arrive, assuming they work in Vermont winters.

[Jeff V]

So kids here might need some new survival skills, and those who can't quickly adapt might become Darwin's latest victims.

In the Philippines, I've been in buses and vans traveling 60 mph that don't slow down the least bit when approaching a group of children playing in the street. The kids always manage to get out of the way at the last possible instant. Same with other animals, with the unfortunate case of one dog. The van kept going as if it hit a bump in the road.

[wonderpug]

In the Philippines,

I'd be interested in seeing how they program driving AI to handle cities where traffic lanes and directions of travel are just mild suggestions instead of rules.

[Jeff V]

In the Philippines,

I'd be interested in seeing how they program driving AI to handle cities where traffic lanes and directions of travel are just mild suggestions instead of rules.

I believe they use some form of echolocation, so as long as the car beeps its horn continuously, it should be fine.

[Zenn7]

Do you like this example better?

One of the biggest debates about driverless cars concerns the moral choices made when programming a car's algorithms. Say the car is spinning out of control, and on course to hit a crowd queuing at a bus stop. It can correct its course, but in doing so, it'll kill a cyclist for sure. What does it do? Mercedes's answer to this take on the classic Trolley Problem is to hit whichever one is least likely to hurt the people inside its cars. If that means taking out a crowd of kids waiting for the bus, then so be it.

Or this one?

Imagine you're driving down a road with your friend in the front seat. A child suddenly chases a ball into the middle of road, and your only choices are to run the child over or to swerve into a tree, which could kill you and your passenger. What do you do?

It sounds like a test to determine someone's level of psychopathy, but it's actually a choice the developers of autonomous vehicles have been faced with since the idea first materialised.

In an interview published last week with Car and Driver, the manager of driver-assistance systems at Mercedes-Benz, Christoph von Hugo, revealed that the company's future autonomous vehicles would always put the driver first. In other words, in the above dilemma, they will be programmed to run over the child every time.

Actually, yes. Those are scenarios I can relate to as somewhat viable. Though I'm wondering why my super-safe self-driving car is spinning out of control?

In regards to kids running out from the side of the road chasing a ball (or whatever) though, maybe sensors that detect things approaching the side of the road and would start slowing down/calculating alternatives prior to the absolute last second when it's too late? Would not solve every problem but seems like it would significantly reduce the frequency of these extreme situations becoming issues wouldn't it? (I have not read up on these and by no means pretend to have any expertise on the subject, just tossing the thought out there to see what I'm missing).

[wonderpug]

What do you think, within the next 10 years for there to be some major law suit due to a horrible accident caused by someone hacking their computer AI to put higher prioritization on the car passengers? How would that even shake out? "Your honor, I was acting in self-defense" seems like it would be a perfectly valid argument.

[Jeff V]

What do you think, within the next 10 years for there to be some major law suit due to a horrible accident caused by someone hacking their computer AI to put higher prioritization on the car passengers? How would that even shake out? "Your honor, I was acting in self-defense" seems like it would be a perfectly valid argument.

I don't see it working any differently than it does today with human drivers. There should, in theory, be far less incidents than there is now. Testing so far is bearing this out, but if something goes wrong once mass deployment commences, there will have to be programming adjustments done quickly.

A self-driving car would always be following the speed limits and always operate itself in the safest way given road conditions. There will still be those rare instances where something unavoidable happens, but I think it will be far rarer than with human drivers who are inclined to occasionally not follow traffic laws or act accordingly in poor road conditions.

[Paingod]

I don't see it working any differently than it does today with human drivers. There should, in theory, be far less incidents than there is now. Testing so far is bearing this out, but if something goes wrong once mass deployment commences, there will have to be programming adjustments done quickly.

I agree. Statistically, self-driving cars may save thousands of lives each year. If we can get the US national automotive death rates from 35,000 to 2,000 just by using self-driving cars, it'd be awesome. I imagine society will help fill in the blanks after each horrific and exceptional incident that the car's programming can't handle.

Automatic traction control can't cope with black ice coated in slick water, and chooses to collide with a bus stop with 6 kids in it instead of careening into oncoming traffic? Society will respond with concrete stanchions to prevent the programmed car from doing it again. Then the choice gets easier - slam into a stanchion, or head-on with another vehicle - stanchion, every time.

Maybe we could look at these loops in programming and see if we can alter the physical world to minimize or eliminate them before they happen, but probably not. The history of safety innovation is written in blood, not common sense.

[wonderpug]

What do you think, within the next 10 years for there to be some major law suit due to a horrible accident caused by someone hacking their computer AI to put higher prioritization on the car passengers? How would that even shake out? "Your honor, I was acting in self-defense" seems like it would be a perfectly valid argument.

I don't see it working any differently than it does today with human drivers. There should, in theory, be far less incidents than there is now. Testing so far is bearing this out, but if something goes wrong once mass deployment commences, there will have to be programming adjustments done quickly.

A self-driving car would always be following the speed limits and always operate itself in the safest way given road conditions. There will still be those rare instances where something unavoidable happens, but I think it will be far rarer than with human drivers who are inclined to occasionally not follow traffic laws or act accordingly in poor road conditions.

You're completely right but good luck convincing the general public to trust statistics over gut feeling. We're a society that still uses "have a safe flight" as the standard farewell for the safest method of travel.

[Max Peck]

From the case files of Captain Obvious: Automated cars could threaten jobs of professional drivers

Ronald De Feo has watched robots take factory jobs for years. Now he sees them threatening a new class of worker: People who drive for a living.

"I am in Pittsburgh; it's a test market for Uber's autonomous vehicle," says De Feo, CEO of the industrial materials firm Kennametal. "We see all these (automated) Ubers running around the streets of Pittsburgh, a confusing and difficult place to navigate. If they can make that work, what do you think happens to the job of being a taxi driver?"

Computer scientists and economists say the threat isn't merely theoretical: Automated cars pose an existential threat to the many Americans who drive for a living: 2.9 million truckers and delivery drivers, 674,000 bus drivers, 181,000 cab drivers and chauffeurs.

The big question is how long it will take auto and tech companies to clear the technical hurdles to turning the streets over to driverless cars.

[Isgrimnur]

We will see 21st-century Luddites smashing them with sledgehammers.

2015

The first two mines in the world to start moving all of their iron ore using fully remote-controlled trucks have just gone online in Western Australia's Pilbara.

Mining giant Rio Tinto is running pits at its Yandicoogina and Nammuldi mine sites, with workers controlling the driverless trucks largely from an operations centre in Perth, 1,200 kilometres away.
...
Rio's plans do not stop at trucks. It is also trialling unmanned trains and mining with robot drills with the aim of rolling out the machines across as many of its mine sites as possible.

Eventually most of the company's supply chain from the pit to the port will be remote controlled from Perth.

[Jeff V]

Nah, after a few whacks, their blank lungs will have them gasping for air and giving up like Homer Simpson.

[Paingod]

I had a thought the other day while we were sitting in a theater and watching an ad for a 'meals on wheels' program that brought food and company to seniors who are basically housebound because they can't drive.

I think it'd be awesome if the future of driverless ride-sharing included an option to 'donate' your vehicle's time to pick up seniors and drop them off at centers where they could socialize - effectively allowing them to get out and have a life without people going to their houses one at a time. I know it would probably be a jarring experience for an elderly person, but after the initial "OH MY GOD" of sitting in a driverless car, they might come to enjoy getting out again.

I was also thinking that any driverless solution that you could use MUST include some kind of camera to record the inside of the vehicle so you can attribute damage and filth to the right passengers and extract payment, as well as blacklist them so they can't get automated rides again.

[wonderpug]

My wife is legally blind. There are no public transportation options where we live now so she has to entirely rely on me and on family & friends to get anywhere. Self-driving cars are going to be lifechanging for her.

[em2nought]

Drove a big Lincoln rental car around all week. Gahhhhh, too inspector gadget for me. I don't want my car telling me it might be time to take a nap, or that my camera cover requires cleaning. This thing was WORSE than my supposedly "smart" phone about doing crap I didn't want it to do. Things like deciding for itself to change the air conditioning fan speed or turn on the windshield wiper blades. ...and no I don't want the trunk opened just before I start to back out of a parking space.

It did ride real nice for a senior citizen, but I'll build a kit car before I'd buy one of those Lincolns.

[wonderpug]

I agree on that, I want the next car I purchase to be as manually operated as possible when it comes to things like headlights, wipers, or temperature. Just about every automated feature I've seen on my cars or on rental cars is at best mildly helpful in a handful of specific scenarios where they work as intended, but absolutely infuriating in the multitude of scenarios where they don't quite do what you want them to do. I'd rather just push a button or turn a dial to get exactly what I want, instead of trying to play games with some fuzzy logic processor.

On a related note, I want as few touchscreen controls as possible on my next car. It's been nearly 15 years since I drove my old 1990 Jeep Cherokee, but if you stuck me in one now I'd still be able to operate every radio and climate control by feel with my eyes closed.

[em2nought]

It's been nearly 15 years since I drove my old 1990 Jeep Cherokee, but if you stuck me in one now I'd still be able to operate every radio and climate control by feel with my eyes closed.

Exactly!

[Isgrimnur]

Vegas

The driverless electric shuttle bus that made its debut downtown Wednesday was involved in a minor accident in its first few hours of service, but the human driver of the other vehicle was at fault, police said.

The Metropolitan Police Department said officers responded at 12:07 p.m. to an accident involving the shuttle and a delivery truck on the 100 block of South Sixth Street, near Fremont Street. Damage was minor, and no one was hurt, police said.
...
Police determined that the shuttle came to a stop when it sensed the truck was trying to back up. However, the truck continued to back up until its tires touched the front of the shuttle.

The truck’s driver was cited for illegal backing.

The shuttle, which launched Wednesday, can talk to traffic signals and share the road with other vehicles while stopping for pedestrians. It is offering free rides for up to 11 passengers as it travels a half-mile loop in the Fremont East neighborhood.

[Kelric]

A shuttle for a half-mile loop? If it isn't just taking a bunch of seniors or toddlers around, that seems like a waste (even in the desert).

[Isgrimnur]

Ever walk a half-mile in 100 degree heat under direct sun?

[coopasonic]

Ever walk a half-mile in 100 degree heat under direct sun?

Pretty much every day in the summer...

[Isgrimnur]

Ever walk a half-mile in 100 degree heat under direct sun?

Pretty much every day in the summer...

I doubt our resident Massholes, or those that visit Vegas from the Great White North are nearly as acclimated as we are.

[LawBeefaroni]

r

Ever walk a half-mile in 100 degree heat under direct sun?

Wouldn't it be a 1/4 mile max? If you're walking a loop, you didn't have to walk in the first place.

[Paingod]

Ever walk a half-mile in 100 degree heat under direct sun?

Pretty much every day in the summer...

I doubt our resident Massholes, or those that visit Vegas from the Great White North are nearly as acclimated as we are.

100 degrees aint so bad, as long as it's dry. Up here in Maine, while we don't see 100 very often, when it gets close it's also humid enough to make you feel like you're breathing in pond water. I've been in Arizona in the summer and walked quite a while in the midday sun without melting. I actually found it more pleasant than having to use a spatula to pry myself off of every surface I sit on in hot & humid areas... I'll take a mile in a dry 100 degree noon sun over a mile in humid, sticky 85 degree weather.

[Daehawk]

They need to add an arm to the self driving stuff so it can shake its fist and yell "STUPID HUMAN!!"

[Isgrimnur]

Bloomberg

A self-driving car from Uber Technologies Inc. hit and killed a woman in Tempe, Arizona, on Sunday evening, what is likely the first pedestrian fatality involving a driverless vehicle. In response, Uber quickly halted its self-driving cars as the incident is investigated.

The woman was crossing the road when the Uber vehicle, operating in autonomous mode, struck her, according to the Tempe Police Department. She was transferred to a local hospital where she died from her injuries. "Uber is assisting and this is still an active investigation," Liliana Duran, a spokeswoman from the Tempe police, said in an emailed statement.

Uber said on Monday that it was pausing tests of all its autonomous vehicles in Pittsburgh, San Francisco, Toronto and the greater Phoenix area. “Our hearts go out to the victim’s family," a company spokeswoman said in a statement. "We are fully cooperating with local authorities in their investigation of this incident."

[Daehawk]

Maybe when Im 70 in 21 years. Right now Ill stick with my loud polluting suicide machine.

[Pyperkub]

It's important to note that the woman was not in a crosswalk and that there was a driver who also didn't see her in time.

[LawBeefaroni]

What are the back-up drivers doing in these tests? Are they actively sitting on controls with their head in a swivel or just kind of sitting back and making sure the car doesn't start going off-road or some other crazy thing?

Guessing it was a weird convergence of circumstances because even regular cars with emergency breaking are good about seeing pedestrians.

[Zaxxon]

Police Dept is saying that they don't see how anyone would have missed her. Tragic, but sounds like it's not an autonomous driving issue.

[stessier]

Police Dept is saying that they don't see how anyone would have missed her. Tragic, but sounds like it's not an autonomous driving issue.

I thought they were saying that everyone would have missed her. That she walked out between two cars and a shadowed area into the traffic lane.

Edit: From Ars

Herzberg was "pushing a bicycle laden with plastic shopping bags," according to the Chronicle's Carolyn Said, when she "abruptly walked from a center median into a lane of traffic."

After viewing video captured by the Uber vehicle, Moir concluded that “it’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode (autonomous or human-driven) based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway."

Moir added that "it is dangerous to cross roadways in the evening hour when well-illuminated, managed crosswalks are available."

[Zaxxon]

I meant missed hitting her. In other words, everyone would have hit her.

[stessier]

I meant missed hitting her. In other words, everyone would have hit her.

Ahhh, that makes sense. Sorry.

[Zaxxon]

I meant missed hitting her. In other words, everyone would have hit her.

Ahhh, that makes sense. Sorry.

Poor word choice on my part.

[Brian]

I live in Mesa and am right on the edge of Tempe. I don't normally see a lot of the Uber self driving cars but I can't go a block without seeing one of the ubiquitous Google Waymo vehicles.

[Punisher]

Police Dept is saying that they don't see how anyone would have missed her. Tragic, but sounds like it's not an autonomous driving issue.

I thought they were saying that everyone would have missed her. That she walked out between two cars and a shadowed area into the traffic lane.

Edit: From Ars

Herzberg was "pushing a bicycle laden with plastic shopping bags," according to the Chronicle's Carolyn Said, when she "abruptly walked from a center median into a lane of traffic."

After viewing video captured by the Uber vehicle, Moir concluded that “it’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode (autonomous or human-driven) based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway."

Moir added that "it is dangerous to cross roadways in the evening hour when well-illuminated, managed crosswalks are available."

It's crazy how people still don't understand standard crossing practices..
About 3 weeks ago, I literally came within 3 feet of killing someone. I was driving to work around 5AM. It was still very dark at the time. I was driving on a local highway approaching an intersection where I had a green light. Since it was a highway, I was doing about 50ish. As I approached the light I saw someone crossing the highway AGAINST the light. I was in the left lane and they were crossing from my right to my left. They were wearing dark clothing so I only saw them at the last second and swerved into the middle lane, even then, I only missed them by about 3 feet.. They didn't even seem to react and just kept walking.. That was almost a very bad day for everyone and it made me glad that I have a dashcam because that would have required some explaining. If I hadn't seen them and reacted just enough, I doubt they would have survived.. Not sure how I would have reacted after the fact either, although I'd stop and attempt first aid, but still..