Autonomous Vehicles

A few years ago autonomous vehicles (AV’s)  were being hailed as a technology that was transformative and coming very soon. Driverless vehicles provide a solution to the pesky problem of what to do with seniors who should not be driving, and suggested an orderly way to keep vehicles moving efficiently in cities. But the downside has started to become evident, including how to deal with the ethics of a car created to save its occupants ahead of more vulnerable road users like pedestrians and cyclists. And what to do and who to blame if an autonomous vehicle kills a vulnerable road user? While the technology has apparently driven a vehicle across the United States, it has not advanced enough to deal with the intricacies and complexities of city driving.

Chandler Arizona was one of the “lucky” places where autonomous vehicle trials by Google’s Waymo first commenced, but there have now been over twenty attacks on these vehicles. From tire slashing, stone throwing, to braking in front of these vehicles and trying to run them off the road, local citizens are expressing their doubts and fears about the technology. I have written about the “edge cases” and how the killing of a lady in Tempe Arizona walking her bike across a highway exemplifies the situations where the technology could not ascertain the vehicle needed to stop.

Sometimes it is not so much what people boast about but what they do not say that gives you a good insight in how a new technology is developing. And as reported in Digital Trends Anthony Levandowski, has made a startling claim. Mr. Levandowski who was fired from Uber over allegedly stolen intellectual property started his own self driving technology firm, Pronto.

Stating he wanted to build the best self -driving vehicle in the world he set out to create the best software. With that software Levandowski claims he sent a Toyota Prius driving from San Francisco to New York City without a human touching any of the controls.

PT commenter Geof put up a response to this post that’s worthy of bringing forward – mainly because he nails an issue that isn’t getting enough attention: what will happen to our streets if we priorize the needs of autonomous vehicles.

I have said before that I don’t think self-driving cars will work in mixed urban traffic unless roads and rules are changed to keep pedestrians, cyclists, and so forth out of the way. There has already been a proposal that pedestrians should be required to wear beacons to avoid being killed by self-driving cars.

I am certain that if the AIs are actually safe, pedestrians and others (call them “road trolls”, even though I would consider them heroes) will fool them, slowing them down substantially, leading right back to separate ’em, tag ’em, or ban ’em policies aimed at everyone not encased in a tonne of steel.

Woz doesn’t buy the hype either:

‘It may only be one man’s hot take on the issue but Steve is a tech icon and likely someone others will listen to, despite his not being an expert on autonomous systems. . . .  the brunt of Wozniak’s ire seemed to be targeted at Tesla’s AV program. “Tesla makes so many mistakes,” he said. “It really convinces me that auto piloting and auto steering car driving itself is not going to happen.”’

I do think that self-driving vehicles will do fine on segregated highways, despite their current habit of accelerating into stopped vehicles. Self-driving BRT might be possible too. I don’t think making trucks and buses more like trains is the revolution people are anticipating.