[log in to unmask]"
alt="imap:[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.2&filename=hejedgabmgkdglfj.png"
class=""
height="100"
width="169"
border="0">
SmartDrivingCar.com/6.40-Insurance-092218
39th edition of the 6th year of SmartDrivingCars
P. Comfort,
Sept 14, "Last
November, Las
Vegas launched
an autonomous
bus route along
a tourist-heavy
stretch of
Fremont Street,
sponsored by AAA
and using a
Navya AV
operated by
Keolis Transit.
Why it
matters:
Cities across
America are
beginning to
test driverless
buses —
including pilots
in Austin and
Detroit — but
Las Vegas was
the first to
deploy them on
public streets
in mixed
traffic, and its
program is now
the largest AV
bus pilot in the
U.S. Other than
a first day
snafu, when
another truck
ran into the AV,
the service has
run safely and
without
incident.
The details:
The AV shuttle
is a free
service for Las
Vegas visitors
and residents
that provides
transit between
the Downtown
Container Park
and the Fremont
Street
Experience.
Passengers
traverse eight
city
intersections,
six traffic
lights, and two
stop signs — all
without a
driver, though
the bus does
host an onboard
"attendant" who
acts as an
ambassador,
educating riders
on how the AV
technology
works.
Since launch,
the service has
transported more
than 35,000
passengers,
helping to test
the acceptance
of AVs in public
transit. Early
signs are
positive: It has
earned a
passenger rating
of 4.5 out of 5
stars for its
driving,
according to
Francis Julien
at Keolis
Transit..." Read more Hmmmm....
The "Why it
Matters" and
the "Details"
are
important.
Operating on
public streets
in mixed
traffic is no
small accomplishment!.
I does have an
"ambassador"
on board.
All systems
will/do have
them in the
beginning.
The record so
far is
impressive. As
more
experience is
gained, it
will be able
to scale to
provide
mobility to
the many that
don't need an
attendant but
need to be
able to get
from where
they are to
where they
are going when
they want
to go
affordably.
Wouldn't that
be something.
A transit
system that
caters to
serve the
demand of its
customers
rather than
demanding that
the rider is
forced to
adhere to
the system's
fixed routes
(of which
there are few)
at fixed times
(which are
certainly not
24/7 and
widely
separated).
When combined
the scheduled
service
actually end
up serving so
very few.
Alain
A. Davies,,
Sept 21, "The
National Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration,
the arm of the
federal
Department of
Transportation
charged with
reducing the
number of people
killed on US
roads, yesterday
released the
results of the
crash test for
the Tesla Model
3: The car
earned five
stars in every
category.
This perfect
score is a
welcome ray of
sunshine during
a (tweet)stormy
stretch for
Tesla. Also
yesterday,
Bloomberg
reported that
the automaker’s
supply chain
manager had left
the company. But
it’s hardly
surprising.
Without an
engine to work
around, Tesla’s
engineers can
essentially make
the whole front
of the car a
crumple zone,
and having the
heavy battery
just inches off
the ground
limits the risk
of rollovers.
Tesla’s cars
have always
shown themselves
to be safe. A
few years ago,
the Model S
proved so
strong, the
testing
equipment broke
before it did.
The Model X SUV
put up a perfect
score in its
latest exam as
well...." Read more
Hmmmm....
This is really
good news
founded on
excellent
fundamentals
as stated
above. With
no engine to
go through the
firewall and
chop my legs
off and a low
CG (Center of
Gravity)
making it hard
for me to roll
it, the
mitigation of
safety is
substantially
better. And
if the AEB
(Automated
Emergency
Braking)
system
actually
works, along
with the
AutoPilot Lane
Centering and
Intelligent
Cruise
Control, then
you have the
makings of a
car that also
avoids crashes
and running
into "trees"
on top of its
ability to
mitigate
crashes. No
wonder people
are buying
this car.
Alain
B. Liu, 2018,
"The evolution
and formation of
our urban fabric
have an
inextricable
relationship
with
transportation
and urban
mobility. The
revolution in
speed and power
of
transportation
as a result of
the automobile
in the early
1900’s brought
about radical
changes in how
cities were
designed and
constructed.
City streets,
previously built
for horse-drawn
vehicles and
foot traffic,
were modernized
with asphalt and
segregated for
the sake of
speed and
convenience.
Parking lots,
garages and gas
stations were
carved out of
the city fabric
to support the
population’s
addiction and
dependence on it
as the ultimate
form of
movement.
Expansive
highways and
extensive
networks of
arterial
thoroughfares
were put in
place as cities
began to undergo
urban sprawl.
As North
American cities
have evolved and
developed around
the use of
automobiles, the
requirements to
support its use
have become
increasingly
oppressive to
other forms of
city life.
However, an
upcoming
revolution in
transportation
and urban
mobility,
ushered in by
the development
of autonomous
technology,
willpresent
urban designers
with new
opportunities to
re-evaluate the
relationship
between
motorists and
the city. ..."
Read more
Hmmmm....
Well worth
reading and
pondering!
Alain
Press release,
Sept 18, "The
John S. and
James L. Knight
Foundation today
announced a
five-year,
$5,250,000
initiative that
brings residents
to the center of
self-driving
vehicle pilot
projects
happening in
five U.S.
cities: Detroit;
Long Beach,
California;
Miami; San Jose,
California; and
Pittsburgh.
The investment
is the largest
of Knight
Foundation’s
efforts to
develop
people-centered
Smart Cities,
which aims to
harness the
growth of
digital
technology to
improve how
communities
respond, connect
to and engage
with residents.
The pilot
projects will be
designed to
engage local
residents around
self-driving car
deployments to
ensure that they
reflect
community input
and meet local
needs... " Read
more
Hmmmm....
In a large
sense, exactly
what we are
trying to do
in Central
Jersey focused
on serving the
needs of the
Mobility
Disadvantaged...
Those that are
poor, don't
have access to
a car and
aren't served
by transit.
The service of
the mobility
needs of these
folks
should/must be
the initial
focus of
Driverless
cars. If you
wish to
interactively
investigate
where these
households are
located in New
Jersey launch
this
viewer in
Chrome or Edge
and cut &
paste this
file. (
Launch this
file in your
browser, save
it someplace
(desktop) and
then use the
viewer's
browse
capability to
paste it in
the viewer).
Displayed
(with
interactive
and mouse-over
capabilities)
are the number
of households
per 1/4 sq.
mile area in
NJ that are in
the lowest
decile of
Mobility Index
= f{HH income,
autoAvailability, proximity2NJTransitStop}. One can see that people who
could most
benefit from
this mobility
don't just
live in
"cities".
The Knight
Foundation
should also
pay attention
to Central
Jersey and in
fact all of
New Jersey.
Alain
Press Repease,
Sept 17,
"Bpifrance is
supporting the
growth of
EasyMile, a
pioneer in the
development
of autonomous
vehicle
solutions, by
investing €6.5
million in the
company, joining
the founders as
well as
industrial
shareholders,
Alstom and
Continental....EasyMile
is best known
for its
fully-electric
autonomous
shuttle, the
EZ10, which
transports up to
15 people and
has been
successfully
rolled out in
over 200
sites
worldwide...."
Read more Hmmmm....
Congratulations Gilbert. Aa most well-deserved investment. Compared to
the
valuations/investments
in the
Driverless Car
world, this is
indeed a
bargain for
Bpifarance.
Alain
M. Gardiner,
Sept 20, "The
auto industry
has a choice to
make: Which
language will
cars speak when
they talk to one
another?
Until a couple
of years ago,
automakers
agreed on one
vehicle-to-vehicle
communications
platform, called
dedicated
short-range
communications,
or DSRC, based
on the
technology used
for Wi-Fi. But
some car
companies have
begun to favor a
competing
protocol, known
as Cellular V2X,
which is based
on a
next-generation
version of the
technology used
by your mobile
phone. So far,
the federal
government has
held back on
enforcing a
standard. A
proposed rule
mandating
deployment of
DSRC equipment
in new vehicles
has languished
for nearly two
years, and
critics say the
delay is making
motorists less
safe. But
supporters of
the competing
standard say
something better
has come along.
“You’ve got
public agencies
who want to
deploy, but we
don’t have a
standard, so
what do I buy?”
asked Kirk
Steudle,
director of
Michigan’s
Department of
Transportation
and a supporter
of the DSRC
standard.
“Betamax, or a
VHS?”..." Read
more Hmmmm....
Let's see, the
reason VHS won
was because a
big industry (the
adult film
industry)
chose VHS.
Has that or
any other big
industry
(other than a
few car
companies who
"will"/ (may)
do something
"next year"),
or any other
industry
chosen
DSRC??? The
over/under
probability
that DSRC =
BetaMax is
0.90 (Don't
give up.
Hilary had a 0.99
probability of
winning.)
Alain
S. Belchler, Sept 2018, "This report was funded by Crown Castle, the nation’s largest provider of communications infrastructure, in an effort to consider and support the needs of carriers, vehicle manufacturers and local governments as they prepare to meet the infrastructure, regulatory, and security requirements of the connected and autonomous vehicles ecosystem. The views, opinions, and recommendations expressed herein are exclusively those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Crown Castle....
U.S. DOT
Should Require
That AVs Are
Connected.
All respondents
of our survey
agreed that if
connected
vehicle
technology were
available and
reliable that
they would use
it.... " Read more Hmmmm....
Of course.
Unfortunately,
the implied
view of this
report and,
maybe, that of
US DoT, was/is
that AVs are
consumer-owned,
much as
today's
conventional
cars. I could
not find in
this report
any inkling of
the thought
that AVs
(Driverless
vehicles) will
be Fleet-owned
and used to
provide
on-demand
mobility to
everyone and
especially the
Mobility
Disadvantaged.
In that
scenario, yes,
they will be
connected, but
their
connection and
the
communications
will be to
support the
fleet
management
needs of the
fleet operator
and the
service needs
of the
traveling
public and NOT
necessarily
that of US DoT
or local
agencies.
Thus any
services or
capabilities
envisioned in
this report
will need to
piggy back
onto what the
fleet operator
can justify
through an RoI
and not the
other way
around. So
this report
should be
recommending
that US DoT
figure out how
to best
achieve its
mission using
any excess
capacity on
the Fleet
Manager's Com
system rather
than unduly
burdening the
Fleet Operator
with its
needs. The
Fleet Operator
is providing a
valuable
public service
by providing
affordable
mobility to
the general
public and
should not be
unduly burden
with
alleviating
the problems
caused by
single-occupant
drivers of
conventional
cars. Alain
Sept. 11, "The
objective of
this BAA is to
develop an
innovative and
synergistic
truck platooning
pilot deployment
concept, to
build
partnerships
among
stakeholders,
and to prepare a
comprehensive
deployment plan
and proposal
that enables the
assessment of
such a concept.
It will
accelerate
deployment of
cooperative
automated
vehicle
technologies to
support the
freight
industry,
enabling trucks
to safely follow
each other at
distances that
enable the
vehicles to save
fuel, thereby
enhancing the
economic
competitiveness
of freight
shippers and
lowering the
costs of landed
goods for
consumers...."
Read more Hmmmm....
The last gasp
of the
Connected
Vehicle folks
@ USDoT???
Over-under
probability on
a Phase 2 is
0.10 !?! Alain
N. Wong, Sept
13, "Uber
Technologies
Inc. said it
will spend more
than $150
million in
Toronto to
support
driverless car
research. The
five-year
investment
includes opening
an engineering
hub in Canada’s
biggest city in
early 2019 and
an expansion of
its Advanced
Technologies
Group, the unit
that’s
developing much
of the company’s
autonomous
vehicle
technology. Last
year, Uber began
building an
artificial
intelligence
team in Toronto.
Including
ride-sharing and
food delivery
businesses, Uber
said it will
have more than
500 employees in
the city in
coming
years...." Read more Hmmmm....
Toronto does
seem to be a,
if not the,
leading center
for AI so this
makes a lot of
sense. Only
$150M over 5
years when
other reports
suggest that Uber's
been spending
>$1M/day on
Driverless
cars.!?
Is life in
Canada that
cheap in
Canada???
Alain
S. O'Kane, Sept
12, "Motorcycle
riders die at a
rate 28 times
higher than that
of people behind
the wheel of a
car. It’s safe
to say, then,
that motorcycles
theoretically
stand to benefit
from the recent
boom in the
development of
driver
assistance
technology.
There are unique
challenges, to
be sure, but the
application
looks more
possible than
ever, thanks to
a new video of a
self-driving
motorcycle
released by BMW
Motorrad, the
company’s
two-wheeler
division.
BMW Motorrad
says it’s been
working on the
technology for
more than two
years, and the
effort shows.
The short video
showcases a BMW
motorcycle
cruising around
a test track
with no driver,
starting from a
stop, leaning
into turns, and
braking all by
itself.... " Read more
Hmmmm...
Couple of
comment... 1.
See
video. it
is very good.
2. There are
really good
reasons why
this
Safe-driving
Motorcycle" is
a really good
idea,
especially the
safety
reason as
to why a
cyclist should
want this.
and 3. (The)
Anthony
Levandowski
did this (sort
of, or at
least wanted
to do it) back
in the 2005
Grand
Challenge
See
video
Alain
N. Levy, Sept 18, "Audi just became the latest carmaker to integrate Amazon’s digital brain Alexa into its vehicles.... The integration allows drivers to do things like check news, weather, sports scores, order groceries, add things to to-do lists, stream music and audiobooks via Amazon Music and Audible and access smart home controls. " Read more Hmmmm.... Just what we need, more distraction of the driver from paying attention to driving. Alexa... Please don't hit me!!! So Bad!!! Alain
J. Allen, Sept
13, "An app that
automatically
detects how many
people are in
one vehicle,
could help more
drivers take
advantage of
discounted toll
rates for high
occupancy
vehicles North
Texas highways.
... It works by
sensing when
mobile devices
with an
installed app,
are traveling
next to each
other down a
defined
corridor. ...
Steinberg said
Carma has
developed
algorithms to
try to stop
people who try
to cheat the
technology, by
having extra
account,
carrying two
phones or
leaving an extra
beacon in the
car.... " Read more Hmmmm....
Right!?? How
easy will it
be to defeat
that
algorithm,
not!!!
So it doesn't
count people
and it
certainly
doesn't count
the number of
cars that were
left at home,
which is the
only reason to
provide a
discount or
use of a
priority lane
because you've
somehow
contributed to
the reduction
of congestion
by leaving a
car at home.
Alain
Sept 20, "Presenter Paul Hutton rides in a driverless pod around the Bella Centre with the CEO of the UK’s Transport Systems Catapult and we talk MaaS with an expert from Atkins..." Read more Hmmmm.... This is the only thing that I could find that related to AVs/SmartDrivingCars @ the 25th ITS World Congress in Copenhagen this past week. After 25 years, ITS still hasn't gotten the message. Glad that I had an excuse that I had to teach classes and couldn't go, although I hated to miss Richard Bishop's ITFVHA session last Sunday. I'm certain there was good information exchanged there and that I'll be able to link to some of the presentations as soon as Richard puts them online. Alain
"...After years
of testing, with
hundreds of cars
and vans
deployed on
public streets
and private
facilities, even
the best
autonomous-driving
efforts still
struggle with
inclement
weather. The
ultimate hurdle
to the next
phase of
driverless
technology might
not come from
algorithms and
artificial
intelligence—it
might be fog and
rain.
Another
Boston-area
startup is
promising a way
to solve these
weather woes,
just as leading
players race to
launch viable
businesses. WaveSense has
built a radar
system to scan
what’s below the
road, down where
there’s no snow
at all, rather
than parse
wintry mix on
top...." Read more Hmmmm....
Cut
it out
Bloomberg...
Since these
will be
traveling of
roads with
human drivers,
none should
attempt to
travel in Fog
or in any
weather that a
human can't
handle. Also,
this is the
worse back
f=dorr way to
sell ground
penetrating
radar so that
you know where
you are, but
you have no
idea what you
are going to
hit. So
bad!! C'mon
Man!!! Alain
3rd
Annual
Princeton SmartDrivingCar
Summit
evening May
14 through May
16, 2019
Save the Date; Reserve your Sponsorship
Catalog
of Videos of
Presentations
@ 2nd Annual
Princeton
SmartDrivingCar
Summit
Photos
from 2nd
Annual
Princeton
SmartDrivingCar
Summit
Program
& Links to
slides from
2nd Annual
Princeton
SmartDrivingCar
Summit
F. Fishkin, Sept 6, "The coming new world of driverless cars! In Episode 55 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast former GM VP and adviser to Waymo Larry Burns chats with Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and Fred Fishkin about his new book "Autonomy: The Quest to Build the Driverless Car and How it Will Reshape Our World"
F. Fishkin, Aug 26, "The impact of the Hitch service murders in China on ride sharing, Toyota's investment in Uber and the issue of who controls data...are the focus of Episode 54 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast. Co-hosts Alain Kornhauser of Princeton University and Fred Fishkin are joined by The Dispatcher publisher Michael Sena."
F. Fishkin, Aug 26, "Ralph Nader weighs in when it comes to safety regulations for self driving vehicles.... but is his focus in the right place? Princeton University's Alain Kornhauser offers up his thoughts on that and more ...from Zoox, to Waymo, Lyft and Drive.AI in Episode 53 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast with co-host Fred Fishkin. Tune in and subscribe!"
F. Fishkin, Aug 18, "Uber's future is linked to it's ability to deploy self driving vehicles. That's what Princeton University's Alain Kornhauser says in Episode 52 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast with co-host Fred Fishkin. Also...the latest from Ford, Tesla, Elon Musk, Kroger and more. Tune in and subscribe!"
F. Fishkin, Aug 11, "Waymo worth 175 billion dollars before it starts charging for rides? Join Princeton University's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for Episode 51 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast. And the latest on Uber and the battle with New York City, Olli shuttles off to Buffalo, Tesla and BMW."
Aug 3, F. Fishkin, , "Drive.ai gets ready for self driving tests in Texas, Waymo partners with public transit, Tesla's self driving chips and the latest on Uber and Lyft. All that and more in Episode 50 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast with Princeton University's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin. Tune in and subscribe!"
F. Fishkin, July 27, "When will we shift from buying cars to buying rides? In Episode 49 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast, entrepreneur, speaker and co-author of "The End of Driving: Transportation Systems and Public Policy Planning for Autonomous Vehicles" ...Bern Grush joins co-hosts Alain Kornhauser of Princeton and Fred Fishkin. That along with the latest on Ford, Waymo, Uber and more."
F. Fishkin, July 14, "Self driving taxis from Mercedes? Princeton University's Alain Kornhauser says, "No thank you". Why? Tune in as the faculty chair of autonomous vehicle engineering joins Fred Fishkin for that and much more in episode 47 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast."
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 45 F. Fishkin, June 15, "Waymo marks the first year of its early rider program. The news is good but Princeton's Alain Kornhauser says it could be better. How? Tune in to Episode 45 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast for that and the latest on GM, Voyage, Ford and more "F. Fishkin, June 12, "What is the big mistake California is making in driverless vehicle testing? Princeton University's Alain Kornhauser says the key is to promote ride sharing. Join the professor and co-host Fred Fishkin for Episode 44 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast for more on that, Waymo, Tesla and more.
F. Fishkin, May 10, "The continuing Uber crash investigation, Waymo and Ohio rolls out the welcome mat for the testing of self driving cars. All that and more in Episode 38 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast. This week Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin are joined by Bryant Walker Smith of the University of South Carolina and Stanford. Tune in and subscribe!"
F. Fishkin,
Apr 4, "
Waymo is making
it real! In
Episode 33 of
the Smart
Driving Cars
Podcast, hosts
Fred Fishkin
and
Princeton's
Alain
Kornhauser are
joined by
Michael Sena,
publisher of
The Dispatcher
newsletter.
Take a deep
dive into Waymo's
deals with
Jaguar and
talks with
Honda.. Tesla,
Volvo, Uber
and Ambarella.
And the
Princeton
Smart Driving
Car Summit is
coming
up! "
A. Hawkins,
Sept 13,
"Nuro, the
self-driving
delivery
startup
founded by a
pair of Google
veterans,
released its voluntary
safety report
on
Thursday.
Titled
“Delivering
Safety,” the
33-page
document
outlines the
technology and
procedures
Nuro is using
to safely
deploy its
fleet of
autonomous
delivery
robots.
Formed in
2016, Nuro
has set itself
apart from
other
companies that
are working on
self-driving
technology by
focusing on
delivery
rather than
ride-hailing.
The startup
recently
announced a pilot
delivery
service in
Arizona in
partnership
with grocery
giant Kroger.
In its report,
Nuro touts
what it
believes are
its
competitive
advantages....
With no driver or passengers to worry about, our vehicle can be built to keep what’s outside even safer than what’s inside. It’s lighter, nimbler, and slower than a passenger car, and is equipped with state-of-the-art software and sensing capabilities that never get distracted. With its smaller size and manufacturing costs, we can make vehicles more rapidly. And because it’s electric and fully self-driving, our vehicle can deliver life’s needs at an affordable price...." Read more Hmmmm.... And if Jeff Bezos is watching, watch out. Link to the report. Alain
Waymo team,
June 13,
"Ariel rides
after school.
Neha hops to
the grocery
store. Barbara
and Jim zip
around town
while kicking
back.
They’re all
part of the
Waymo early
rider program
we launched
last April.
Today, over
400 riders
with diverse
backgrounds
use Waymo
every day, at
any time, to
ride all
around the
Phoenix area.
Their feedback
helps us
understand how
fully self
driving cars
fit into their
daily lives.
One year in,
our early
rider program
and our
extensive
on-road
testing is
helping us
build the
world’s most
experienced
driver. In
fact, our
fleet of cars
across the
U.S. is now
driving more
than 24,000
miles daily;
that’s the
equivalent of
an around the
world road
trip! Here’s a
quick report
on how our
riders use
Waymo, what
we’ve learned,
and what’s
next....As
some of the
first people
in the world
to use
self-driving
vehicles for
their everyday
transportation
needs, our
early riders
are helping
shape this
technology.
Thanks to
their
feedback,
we’re refining
the rider
experience to
make sure
that: ...
nobody wants
to carry
grocery bags a
block down the
street... " Read
more Hmmmm....
Yipes!! The
personal car
isn't bad
enough in its
focus on
private
single-occupant
parkingSpot2parkingSpot mobility? Are we now going to have Waymo
providing it
Door2Door with
zero
opportunity to
share rides
and while
delivering
negative
public
benefits of
increased
energy,
pollution and
congestion
with all of
its empty
vehicle
repositioning.
No wonder the
CPUC voted to
forbid
ride-sharing.
Did Waymo made
them do it
since Waymo
hasn't done
ride-sharing
in Phoenix?
Having 2 or
more people in
the car isn't
ride sharing
if they would
have all gone
together in
their own car
had Waymo not
been there. So
Bad!!! Without
ride-sharing,
this is just
expensive,
energy
inefficient
and
environmentally
challenged
private
chauffeuring
for the
entitled
privileged
class:
See
video Just
like watching
Oszzie & Harriet
or Leave
it to Beaver.
For Waymo to
"Win it",
they'll need
to embrace
ride-sharing
because no
"Blue-state"
PUC is going
to be as
impressionable
as as
California's.
Alain
F. Piekniewski, "Deep learning has been at the forefront of the so called AI revolution for quite a few years now, and many people had believed that it is the silver bullet that will take us to the world of wonders of technological singularity (general AI). ...We have now mid 2018 and things have changed. ..By far the biggest blow into deep learning fame is the domain of self driving vehicles ..
But by far the
biggest prick
punching through
the AI bubble
was the accident
in which Uber
self driving car
killed a
pedestrian in
Arizona. From
the preliminary
report by the
NTSB we can read
some astonishing
statements:..."
Read
more Hmmmm....
Very
interesting.
We still have
an awful lot
to do. See
also,G.
Marcus,
below. Alain
KMay 24, "About
9:58 p.m., on
Sunday, March
18, 2018, an
Uber
Technologies,
Inc. test
vehicle, based
on a modified
2017 Volvo XC90
and operating
with a
self-driving
system in
computer control
mode, struck a
pedestrian on
northbound Mill
Avenue, in
Tempe, Maricopa
County, Arizona.
...The vehicle
was factory
equipped with
several advanced
driver
assistance
functions by
Volvo Cars, the
original
manufacturer.
The systems
included a
collision
avoidance
function with
automatic
emergency
braking, known
as City Safety,
as well as
functions for
detecting driver
alertness and
road sign
information. All
these Volvo
functions are
disabled when
the test vehicle
is operated in
computer
control..."
Read more
Hmmmm....
Uber must
believe that
its systems
are better at
avoiding
Collisions and
Automated
Emergency
Braking than
Volvo's.
At least this
gets Volvo
"off the
hook".
"...According to data obtained from the
self-driving
system, the
system first
registered
radar and
LIDAR
observations
of the
pedestrian
about 6
seconds before
impact, when
the vehicle
was traveling
at 43 mph..."
(=
63
feet/second)
So the system
started
"seeing an
obstacle when
it was 63 x 6
= 378 feet
away... more
than a
football
field,
including end
zones!
"...As the vehicle and pedestrian paths
converged, the
self-driving
system
software
classified the
pedestrian as
an unknown
object, as a
vehicle, and
then as a
bicycle with
varying
expectations
of future
travel
path..." (NTSB:
Please tell us
precisely when
it classified
this "object'
as a vehicle
and be
explicit about
the expected "future
travel
paths." Forget the path, please just tell us the precise
velocity
vector that
Uber's system
attached to
the "object",
then the
"vehicle".
Why didn't the
the Uber
system
instruct the
Volvo to begin
to slow down
(or speed up)
to avoid a
collision? If
these paths
(or velocity
vectors) were
not accurate,
then why
weren't they
accurate? Why
was the object
classified as
a
"Vehicle" ?? When did it finally classify the object as a "bicycle"?
Why did it
change
classifications?
How often was
the
classification
of this object
done. Please
divulge the
time and the
outcome of
each
classification
of this
object. In the tests that
Uber has done,
how often has
the system
mis-classified
an object as a
"pedestrian"when the object was
actually an
overpass, or
an overhead
sign or
overhead
branches/leaves
that the car
could safely
pass under, or
was nothing at
all??
(Basically,
what are the
false alarm
characteristics
of Uber's
Self-driving
sensor/software
system as a
function of
vehicle speed
and
time-of-day?)
"...At 1.3 seconds before impact, (impact speed was 39mph = 57.2 ft/sec) the self-driving system determined that an emergency braking maneuver was needed to mitigate a collision" (1.3 x 57.2 = 74.4 ft. which is about equal to the braking distance. So it still could have stopped short.
"...According to Uber,
emergency
braking
maneuvers are
not enabled
while the
vehicle is
under computer
control, to
reduce (eradicate??) the potential
for erratic
vehicle
behavior.
..." NTSB: Please describe/define potential and erratic vehicle
behavior Also
please uncover
and divulge
the design
& decision
process that
Uber went
through to
decide that
this risk
(disabling the
AEB) was worth
the reward of
eradicating "
"erratic vehicle behavior". This
is
fundamentally
BAD design.
If the Uber
system's false
alarm rate is
so large that
the best way
to deal with
false alarms
is to turn off
the AEB, then
the system
should never
have been
permitted on
public
roadways.
"...The vehicle operator
is relied on
to intervene
and take
action. " Wow! If Uber's
system
fundamentally
relies on a
human to
intervene,
then Uber is
nowhere near
creating a
Driverless
vehicle.
Without its
own Driverless
vehicle Uber
is past "Peak
valuation".
K. Pyle, May 9, "Safety and, as importantly, the perception of safety could be the pin that pricks the expectations surrounding the autonomous vehicle future. Recognizing the importance of safety to the success of this still nascent industry, autonomous taxi start-up, Voyage, recently placed their testing and reporting procedures in an open source framework. ...Oliver Cameron, Voyage Co-Founder and CEO, is excited to see participation and says, “We can’t wait to have all of these contributions from companies from around the world; contribute to build the actual standard in autonomous safety.” Read more, Hmmmm.... See the video that was played at the Princeton SDC Summit which generated substantial positive discussion at the Summit. See also full length video. Alain
A. Efrati, May
7, "Uber has
determined that
the likely cause
of a fatal
collision
involving one of
its prototype
self-driving
cars in Arizona
in March was a
problem with the
software that
decides how the
car should react
to objects it
detects,
according to two
people briefed
about the
matter." Read
more Hmmmm....Uber
is "leaking"
this??? Is
this Spin?
Fake News??
I guess Uber
doesn't
believe in
transparency
here. Where
is the official
public
statement of
reassurance???
"The car’s
sensors detected
the pedestrian,
who was crossing
the street with
a bicycle,
Hmmmm....Pretty much what I wrote on March 24, the sensors "Saw
something" ...
but Uber’s
software decided
it didn’t need
to react right
away. ..."right
away" is Fake
News. It never
reacted. Uber
has not
released any
data
indicating
that the
software ever
reacted. "That’s
a result of how
the software was
tuned." ...That
was a major
"tuning" faux
pas. What is
being divulged
here is that
Uber's
software never
became
confident
enough that
what it was
seeing was
something that
it should not
hit and, at
least, begin
to apply the
brakes (or
swerve, or
???). Even
the driver in
the video
recognized
that the
object should
not be hit a
split second
before the
crash. So the
Problem
is not
"tuning" it is
outright "fuhgeddaboudit"
Like other
autonomous
vehicle systems,
Uber’s software
has the ability
to ignore “false
positives,” or
objects in its
path that
wouldn’t
actually be a
problem for the
vehicle, such as
a plastic bag
floating over a
road.... Is
Uber
suggesting
that its
software can't
tell the
difference
between a
plastic bag
floating over
the road and a
pedestrian
with a
bicycle, even
after seeing
the object 30
to 60 or more
times over the
3 or more
seconds that
the object was
in view? If
this isn't
Fake News then
Uber is
hopelessly far
behind... In
this case, Uber
executives
believe the
company’s system
was tuned so
that it reacted
less to such
objects." It didn't react at all!...
But the tuning
went too far,
and the car
didn’t react
fast enough, one
of these people
said....
... It didn't
react at all!
If this wasn't
so important
I'd put it in
C'mon man.
"False
positives" are
the symptom,
not the
problem. The
problem is
Uber's system
design and
operational
policy. Uber
system
designers knew
that the
sensors under
certain
conditions
reported
"false
positives"
(were
"spooked").
One of those
conditions was
possibly the
combination of
"is the
closing speed
= car's
current speed"
AND "is the
car's current
speed greater
than 30mph."
In situations
in which both
are true, then
Uber's
"tuning" is outright
"fuhgeddaboudit".
This "tuning"
effectively
turns-off
Uber's sensors
to detecting
anything that
is stationary
or moving
across its
lane ahead. If
Uber has
understood
this, then
Uber
would/should
have ...
1. limited the operation of its cars to speeds under 30 mph,
2.
limited the
operation of
its cars at
speeds greater
than 30 mph only
to
roadways where
pedestrians
are extremely
unlikely to
cross, and
3.
focus on
substantially
improving its
ability to
interpret its
sensor data so
that the false
alarm rate
becomes so
small that
false alarms
are tolerated
throughout
Uber's
operational
domain.
..."Meanwhile,
the human driver
behind the
wheel, who is
meant to take
over and prevent
an accident,
wasn't paying
attention in the
seconds before
the car hit..."
...I
think that
this is a
cheap shot
against the
driver. I
suspect that
this car had a
screen that
displayed the
real-time
status of the
automated
driving
system. I
would not be
surprised if
that screen
was mounted
below the
radio and that
the driver was
actually
monitoring the
operation of
the automated
driving system
prior to the
crash. Why
this display
wasn't on the
dash so that
the driver's
peripheral
vision could
remain on the
road ahead
when the
driver was
monitoring the
performance of
the system is
a question
Uber should
answer,... if
it had any
interest in
being
transparent.
Another
question that
Uber could be
asked: Why
didn't the
monitoring
system warn
the driver
that it was
"seeing
something"
and ask the
driver to look
to see if it
should be
"saying/doing
something".
Since
it doesn't
look like Uber
is going to
really divulge
anything, it
is incumbent
on the NTSB to
dig deeply
into this
"false alarm"
issue.
Disregarding
"false
positives" in
order to
circumvent a
little
passenger/customer
discomfort
enables "false
negatives"
which kill
people. Not
pretty!
A. Madrigal, Mar 28, "On Tuesday, Waymo announced they’d purchase 20,000 sporty, electric self-driving vehicles from Jaguar for the company’s forthcoming ride-hailing service.... But the company embedded a much more significant milestone inside this supposed announcement about a fancy car. With orders now in for more than 20,000 of these vehicles and thousands of minivans that Chrysler announced earlier this year, Waymo will be capable of doing vast numbers of trips per day. They estimate that the Jaguar fleet alone will be capable of doing a million trips each day in 2020. ..." Read more Hmmmm...Yup!! This is HUGE! It will change the city and the key to making it so it doesn't make thing worse is Ride-sharing. If we ride-share we'll reduce energy, pollution & GHG by more than 50% and provide high-quality, affordable mobility indiscriminately for all. It becomes the new high-quality, low-cost mass transit. If it's kept/operated as another alternative for the 1%ers to be chauffeured alone, then the outcome is UGLY. Ride-sharing is KEY! Alain
R. Mitchell,
Mar 22,
"Police late
Wednesday
released a
video that
shows an Uber
robot car
running
straight into
a woman who
was walking
her bicycle
across a
highway in
Tempe, Ariz.
The woman was
taken to a
hospital,
where she died
Sunday night.
The video,
shot from the
car, is sure
to raise
debate over
who's to blame
for the
accident. In
the video, the
victim, Elaine
Herzberg, 49,
appears to be
illegally
jaywalking
from a median
strip across
two lanes of
traffic on a
dark road. But
she was more
than halfway
across the
street when
the car —
traveling
about 40 mph,
according to
police — hit
her. The car
did not appear
to brake or
take any other
evasive
action....
Bryant Walker
Smith, a law
professor and
driverless
specialist at
the University
of South
Carolina,
said:
"Although this
appalling
video isn't
the full
picture, it
strongly
suggests a
failure by
Uber's
automated
driving system
and a lack of
due care by
Uber's driver
as well as by
the
victim."..."
Read more
Hmmmm... "..."What we
now need is
for the
release of the
radar and lidar
data,"
Princeton's
Kornhauser
said in an
email. (Lidar
is a sensing
technology
that uses
light from a
laser.)
"Obviously,
the video of
the driver is
extremely bad
for Uber and
probably
implies that
Uber should
suspend all of
its
'self-driving'
efforts for a
while if not
for a very
long while.
"The
'self-driving'
systems are
supposed to
have
'professional'
overseers who
are really
supposed to be
paying
attention
during these
'tests'.
Apparently
Uber didn't
make it clear
in this case."
Kornhauser
questioned the
police
description of
a situation
that would
have been
difficult to
avoid. He said
Uber should
reveal what
its
collision-avoidance software was doing during the couple of seconds
before impact.
"The
front-facing
video suggests
that this
person was
crossing the
lane at a slow
speed and
should have
been noticed
by the system
in time to at
least apply
the brakes, if
not stop the
vehicle
completely,"
he said.
"While a human
may not have
been able to
avoid this
crash, a
well-designed,
well-working
collision
avoidance
system should
have at least
begun to apply
the
brakes."..."
"
...
Again, my
sincerest
condolences to
Elaine
Herzberg's
family and
friends.
The
simple
arithmetic
is: She
crossed more
than a lane
and a half
before being
struck or more
than 15 feet.
Average
walking speed
is about 4.6 ft/sec
which means
that she was
"visible" on
this stretch
of road for
more than 3
seconds.
Uber's speed
of 38 mph =
55.7 ft/sec
means: Uber
was 150 ft
away when she
began crossing
the left-hand
lane and could
have been
visible by an
alert driver.
The car's lidar
and radar
surely must
have "seen"
her beginning
at about that
time. Car
stopping
distance
including
"thinking time
used in The
Highway Code"
@ 38mph is 110
feet. The
driver should
have been able
to stop 40
feet short.
Any Automated
Emergency
Braking (AEB)
system should
have been able
to stop the
car in little
more than the
stopping
distance of 72
feet, half way
to Elaine.
This simple
arithmetic
suggests that
there may be a
very fundamental
fatal flaw in
Uber's AEB.
And
the driver was
not paying
attention. At
3 seconds
prior to
impact, Elaine
was within a
12 degree
field of view
when she began
to cross the
left lane.
While outside
the fovea,
this is well
within a
normal gaze
had the
operator been
looking out
the window.
The
released video
is from a
"dash cam" and
is unlikely to
be the video
captured by
Uber's
"Self-driving"
system (or
whatever Uber
calls it).
That video may
well be at a
much higher
resolution and
frame rate.
Uber MUST
release that
video (not
just the
dash-cam
video) as well
as the radar
and
lidar
data that was
being used by
their
"Self-driving"
system. Uber
was testing
its system at
the time of
the crash and
therefore MUST
have been
logging those
data in case
something went
wrong. Uber
needs those
recorded data
in order to
have a chance
to learn what
went wrong and
fix it.
Something did
go wrong, very
wrong. Uber
and everyone
else MUST also
have the
opportunity to
learn from
this tragedy.
So Uber MUST
release all of
the data.
Alain
R. Mitchell,
Mar 21, "As
long as robot
cars roam
public streets
and highways,
they will
occasionally
kill people.
That's an ugly
truth that no
one in the
driverless
vehicle
industry can
deny.
Will those
robot cars
kill people at
significantly
lower rates
than drunk,
stoned, tired
or distracted
human drivers
do now?
Automakers,
technology
companies,
politicians
and regulators
are betting
they will, as
driverless
vehicles are
rolling out
faster than
almost anyone
expected as
recently as a
year ago. But
the Sunday
night incident
in Tempe,
Ariz., in
which an Uber
robot car hit
and killed a
woman walking
her bicycle
across the
street, makes
clear the
industry is
much further
behind in
making its
case to the
public.
"It's likely
there will be
far fewer
deaths with
driverless
cars," said
Marlene Towns,
a professor at
Georgetown
University's
McDonough
School of
Business. "But
getting to the
point where
people will be
convinced of
that will be
tough."
Speculation by
Tempe's police
chief that the
robot may not
be at fault in
the crash may
temper any
public or
political
backlash.
Uber was
testing the
robot car in
autonomous
mode with a
human
engineer, who
was behind the
wheel but not
driving.
Elaine
Herzberg, 49,
walking a
bicycle,
stepped in
front of the
car from a
center median,
according to
video
evidence,
police
said...." Read more
Hmmmm...
"...Carmakers
and technology
companies need
to be far more
transparent as
they push
forward,
experts said.
"It's
important that
we all learn
from this
accident and
we make these
technologies
even better,
said Alain
Kornhauser, a
professor at
Princeton
University and
a leading
authority on
driverless
cars. "To that
end Uber must
release all of
the data
leading up to
this crash.
All of the
video, radar,
lidar
and logic
trails for the
three or so
seconds
leading up to
the crash. If
this releases
some of Uber's
intellectual
property, so
be it."..."
" ...
My sincerest
condolences to
Elaine
Herzberg's
family and
friends. I
hope that Uber
with its
"$60"B
valuation will
make a very
generous
contribution
to homeless
charities and
think even
more seriously
about "buying"
(by
partnering)
rather than
"making" this
technology.
Alain
G.
Kumparak,
Mar 13,
"...." Read more
Hmmmm...
This is REALLY
big news.This
marks the real
beginning of
on-demand
mobility
provided by
vehicles
without a
driver or an
attendant
on-board, only
the passengers
and the
vehicles used
normal public
roadways that
operated in
normal
everyday
manner and
used by
conventional
cars and
trucks. Ng
Waymo
to their o
police
escorts, no
warning signs,
just normal
everyday
operating
conditions.
Except for the
one trip given
to Steve Mahan
in November
2015 in Austin
Texas, this is
the First time
that it kind
of mobility
service has
been delivered
anywhere in
the world. Waymo
has achieved 5
million
vehicle miles
of
Self-driving
(automated
driving on
normally
operating
public
roadway;
however, with
a
driver/attendant
in the car
ready to take
over should
the automated
system begin
to fail. Many
others
including
Uber, Lyft/Aptiv,
GM/Cruise, nVIDIA,
Apple, Tesla,
Nissan and
many others
have also done
many miles of
Self-driving
on normal
roads but each
an everyone
had a
driver/attendant
in the vehicle
ready to "save
the day"
should
something go
bad. Nobody
else anywhere
in the world
is doing what
Waymo
is now doing
in Chandler
AZ. Now that
the first one
has been done,
any community
that is
similar to
Chandler AZ
can now think
seriously
about inviting
Waymo
to provide
affordable
on-demand
mobility to
everyone in
their city.
Be
sure to see
the video.
Congratulations
Waymo!!!!!
Alain
D. Etherington, Feb 27, "California’s Department of Motor Vehicles established new rules announced Monday that will allow tech companies and others working on driverless vehicle systems to begin trialling their cars without a safety driver at the wheel. The new rules go into effect starting April 2 ..." Read more Hmmmm... Even though we have been expecting this, it is a major hurdle for it to actually have occurred. How long after April 2 will Waymo take to begin this type of testing. Again this is only testing and deployment, but NOT commercial service, which may happen first in Arizona, but it is a major step in this r-evolution. Commercial services are regulated by other agencies in California, not CA DMV. It is those other agencies that will need to grant/award the licenses for the various commercial operations where these driverless vehicles would be used. This regulation allows properly licensed commercial operations using CA DMV certified driverless vehicles to have those vehicles use California public roadways in delivering the otherwise licensed commercial activity. Note: CA DMV does not license the commercial transport of people or goods. That is the purview of other CA regulatory agencies. Alain
Andrew Hawkins, Jan 30, “Waymo, the self-driving unit of Google parent Alphabet, has reached a deal with one of Detroit’s Big Three automakers to dramatically expand its fleet of autonomous vehicles. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles announced today that it would supply “thousands” of additional Chrysler Pacifica minivans to Waymo, with the first deliveries starting at the end of 2018.
Waymo currently
has 600 of
FCA’s minivans
in its fleet,
some of which
are used to
shuttle real
people around
for its Early
Rider program
in Arizona.
The first 100
were delivered
when the
partnership
was announced
in May 2016,
and an
additional 500
were delivered
in 2017. The
minivans are
plug-in hybrid
variants with
Waymo’s
self-driving
hardware and
software built
in. The
companies
co-staff a
facility in
Michigan, near
FCA’s US
headquarters,
to engineer
the vehicles.
The company
also owns a
fleet of
self-driving
Lexus RX SUVs
that is has
been phasing
out in favor
of the new
minivans. (The
cute “Firefly”
prototypes
were also
phased out
last year.)…”
Read
more Hmmmm...
We’ve all been
wondering”
Who’s going to
make the
cars? How
will that evolve?Will
they magically
appear???
Well….Looks
like it is FCA
for now. We've
gone from a
handful 5
years ago, 2
years ago
added 100,
added 500 last
year,
“thousands”
this/next
year, …
Beginning to
look like
exponential
growth! (A Bit
Coin
Bubble??)
What is also
most
interesting:
no parallel
announcement
that Waymo
was hiring
“thousands of
attendants” to
ride around as
"drivers" in
these
“thousands of
minivans”.
Guess what
that means…
The Kornhauser
Scale is
going to start
really going
up!!! J
While
ultimately
they’ll need
about 35
million of
these to
provide
affordable
mobility to
all in the US,
this is a real
start at
making this
into a
business as
opposed to an
NSF-style
study that
collects dust
on a shelf or,
worse yet, a
digital
manuscript
that is never
downloaded by
anyone outside
a "group of
three". This
is a major
announcement!
From Stan Young: It will be interesting to watch. It probably has the OEMs, Uber and Lyft scared out of their wits. Based on any objective comparison of accomplishment with automated vehicles, there is not a close second to Waymo, despite all the claims to the contrary by trade rags – and the competition knows it. Still a huge unknown concerning the ‘social side’ of riding in an un-attended vehicle, but we will likely get over it like we did with elevators. ‘Thousands’ of vehicles if deployed in one city will put it on scale of Uber and Lyft – an interesting study when/if it comes to that.
...An issue is: where will Waymo choose to deploy (and for Waymo, the word "deploy" is the right word... they make the decision where to place these, in some sense take it or leave it... as opposed to waiting for people to show up at a dealership to buy or have it stay on the lot or have some governmental agency thinking that it actually has a role/power/where-with-all to “deploy”) where, when and how many. They could "flood/concentrate" on Chandler/Phoenix/Tuscon area with scale to be really relevant and substantively demonstrate the evolution of mobility, or they could sprinkle them out nationwide and remain irrelevant everywhere. I like the "flood/concentrate" approach in a state (Arizona) where they seem to be truly welcomed and whose climate, topography and road network are "easy". More importantly it would demonstrate the viability/challenges of the at-scale approach. From our simulations we uncovered that at-scale, one might need to be managing as many as 20,000 aTaxis in a 2.5x2.5 mile area (the extreme in Manhattan, which may be the last place that you want to try this) but it can be large. We’ll drill down in our data and take a look at Chandler/Phoenix and report back as to what we think it would take to provide mobility for all. Alain
Jan. 9, T. Papandreou & E. Casson. "... Waymo driverless service..." Read more Hmmmm... Tim and Ellie made presentation at the Transportation Research Board's Vehicle-Highway Automation (AHB30) Committee meeting on Tuesday in which they gave an update on Waymo's progress to launch "Waymo's driverless service" (slide 11), an app-based ride hailing service to the general public in a geo-fenced area of Arizona. To date Waymo has been testing such a service using volunteer riders in their driverless vehicles in various areas around the country (slide 7): however, to date, except for one ride given to Steve Mahan in Austin, TX, rides on normally operating public streets have always had trained Waymo-authorized personnel (an attendant) in the vehicle capable to intervene in the driving of the vehicle should the need arise. Since October, in Arizona, those personnel no longer sit behind the wheel, but are in the back seat so that Waymo can observe the response of the volunteer riders to riding in a vehicle on normal public streets under normal conditions without anyone in the front seats of the vehicle.
Tim said, without providing a specific date, that Waymo will soon launch "Waymo's driverless service" providing mobility to the general public on public roads in a geo-fenced area of Arizona. I asked Tim "Will that service be offered with vehicles that have an attendant in the vehicle?". Tim's answer was "No!". I asked a follow-up question: "Will these vehicle's have telemetry capabilities that enable these vehicles to be closely monitored from a "situation room" or "control center" that would enable remote operation of the vehicle, should the need arise?". Tim's answer was "No!". Another questioner asked if the geo-fenced area included special "connected vehicle" road infrastructure improvement that Waymo's system will be relying on?" Tim's answer was "No!".
While the definition of "soon" was not given, I've taken this as a really big pronouncement that Waymo is actually going to go to launch commercially-viable on-demand mobility to the general public on conventional public roads. This is really big news because this is finally going to enable us to begin to evolve on the "Kornhauser Scale" ( log of (world-wide VMT of Driverless (VMT-D) vehicles without a human attendant/driver on board accumulated while providing mobility to the general public on conventional roadways). So far we are beyond the "undefined value" associated with VMT-D = 0 and are at KS = 1 only by virtue of the one Steve Mahan ride in Austin). :-) Alain
AP, Nov. 7,
2017 "Waymo,
the self-driving
car company
created by
Google, is
pulling the
human backup
driver from
behind the
steering wheel
and will test
vehicles on
public roads with only an
employee in
the back seat.
The company’s
move — which
started Oct. 19
with an
automated
Chrysler
Pacifica minivan
in the Phoenix
suburb of
Chandler, Ariz.
— is a major
step toward
vehicles driving
themselves on
public roads
without human
backup drivers.
..." Read
more Hmmmm... Not to be
too critical,
but Waymo
is still just
'Self-driving'
. While they
moved the
'engineer'
with the
ability to
'take over and
drive the
vehicle' from
behind the
wheel to the
back seat,
this is just a
step along the
broad
'Self-driving'
continuum
which is a
vehicle that,
under certain
circumstance,
can drive
itself, but
does that only
if there is a
person ready
and able to
take over if
the unexpected
appears.
The
big-leap/major-step will come when Waymo
removes the
'engineer'
entirely from
the vehicle and
it is
human-less
when it
arrives to
pick up a
passenger and
drives
away
human-less
after the last
passenger(s)
disembark.
That enormous
leap-of-faith
in the
technology
will mark Waymo's
inception of
the Driverless
Era. (or
what Waymo
prefers to
call 'Fully
Self-driving'
era.)
Just
to be clear,
when that time
comes, I'm
sure that
Waymo
will have
telemetry
throughout
that
Driverless
vehicle and
there will be
a room full of
engineers in Waymo's
'Situation
Room'
ready to take
over the
driving should
the need
arise.
However,
until that
time, Waymo
is just like
all the other
wanabes,
they are just
'Self-driving'
without the
'Fully'.
The
reason why
'remote
emergency
driving' is
'Driverless'
is because it
scales. By
that I mean
that it takes
the provision
of horizontal
mobility on
our public
streets from
needing at
least one
human per
vehicle to
needing less
than one human
per vehicle.
Initially the
remote driver
will monitor
one car.
Before you
know it that
person will be
monitoring
two, four,
eight, ...
vehicles and
truly
Driverless
with zero
remote human
oversee-ers
will be
approached
asymptotically.
But just like
the old saw
between the
engineer and
the
mathematician:
engineer and
mathematician
were sitting
on a bench
recalling
their youth...
Engineer said
"Long ago, I
was sitting on
this very
bench with my
girl. We
wanted to kiss
but we were
too far
apart. So we
agreed to move
towards each
other by
halving the
distance
between us on
each move.
The
mathematician
blared "
You're so
stupid! If
you did that,
you never came
together!"
The engineer
just smiled:
"we got close
enough!".
Alain
Rulemaking
Actions, Oct 1The following 3 PDFs
are important:
1.
Autonomous
Vehicles
Notice of
Modification
(PDF) Act
2.
Autonomous
Vehicles
Statement of
Reasons (PDF)
Act
3.
Autonomous
Vehicles 15
Day Express
Terms (PDF)
Act Hmmmm..This is all about Driverless!
Thank you
California,
and especially
Dr. Bernard
Soriano, for
leading this
noble effort
and for
continuing to
distinguish
this
technology
from Self-driving
and all of the
various other
names
seemingly
meant to
confuse.
Alain
The docket
material is
available at: https://go.usa.gov/xNvaE"
Read more
Hmmmm... A few comments...
1.
Since lateral
control
(swerving)
couldn't have
avoided this
crash (the
truck is
almost 70 ft
long (6 lanes
wide)
stretching
broadside
across the
highway) , it
doesn't matter
if Josh Brown
ever had his
hands on the
steering
wheel. That's
totally
irrelevant.
2.
Why didn't
autobrake kick
in when the
tractor part
of the
tractor-trailer
passed in
front of the
Tesla?
3.
How fast was
the truck
going when it
cut off the
Tesla. I
couldn't find
the answer in
500 pages.
4.
With sight
distances of
greater than
1,000 feet,
why didn't the
truck driver
see the
Tesla? Was it
the drugs?
5.
This
intersection
invites
"left-turn
run-throughs"
(no stop or
yield and a 53
foot median
and turn lane
need to be
crossed before
one slips
through a gap
in two traffic
lanes. So you
certainly roll
into it,
(plenty of
room to stop
if you see
something
coming) and if
you don't see
anything, you
hit it. If
you're in the
Tesla, you
think you've
been clearly
seem, you
expect the
truck to stop,
it doesn't,
you can't
believe it,
BAM! All in
probably a
second or so.
6.
The head
injury
description (Table 1
p2 of 3)
certainly
suggests that
Joshua Brown
was seated
upright facing
forward at
impact. The
bilateral
lacerations on
the lower arm
from the elbow
to the wrist
may indicate
that he saw it
coming in the
last second
and raised his
arms in an
attempt to
protect his
head. The
evidence
reported
doesn't seem
to suggest he
saw this early
enough to bend
toward the
passenger seat
and try to
pass
underneath.
7.
About 40 feet
of tractor and
trailer passed
directly in
front of the
Tesla prior to
impact.
Depending on
how fast the
truck was
traveling,
that takes
some time.
Has NTSB run
Virtual
Reality
simulations of
various truck
turn
trajectories
and analyzed
what the truck
driver and the
Tesla driver
could/should
have seen?
Seems like a
relatively
simple thing
to do. We
know what the
Tesla was
doing prior to
the crash
(going 74 mph
straight down
the road.) and
we know where
it hit the
truck. How
fast the truck
was traveling
doesn't seem
to be known.
8.
Why wasn't
there any
video captured
from the
Tesla. Didn't
that version
of the MobilEye
system store
the video; I
guess not,
:-(
Anyway,
lots to read
in the 500
pages, but
there is also
a lot
missing. I'm
not linking
the many
articles
reporting on
this because I
disagree with
many of their
interpretations of the facts reported by NTSB. Please reach your own
conclusions.
Alain
May 18,
Enormously
successful
inaugural Summit
starting with
the Adam
Jonas video
and finishing
with
Fred Fishkin's
live interview
with Wm. C
Ford III.
In between, serious engagement among over
150 leaders from
Communities at
the bleeding
edge of
deployment,
Insurance
struggling with
how to properly
promote the
adoption of
technology that
may well force
them to
re-invent
themselves and
AI (Artificial
Intelligence)
and the various
technologies
that are rapidly
advancing so
that we can
actually deliver
the safety,
environmental,
mobility and
quality of life
opportunities
envisioned by
these “Ultimate
Shared-Riding
Machines”.
Save the Date
for the 2nd
Annual... May 16
& 17, 2018,
Princeton NJ Read
Inaugural
Program with
links to
Slides. Fishkin Interview of Summit Summary
and
Interview of
Yann LeCun.
Read Inaugural
Program with
links to
Slides. Hmmmm... Enormous thank you to all who
participated.
Well done!
Alain
Video similar to part of Adam's Luncheon talk @ 2015 Florida Automated Vehicle Symposium on Dec 1. Hmmm ... Watch Video especially at the 13:12 mark. Compelling; especially after the 60 Minutes segment above! Also see his TipRanks. Alain
This list is
maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by
the Princeton
University
Leave
|Re-enter
[log in to unmask]" alt="imap:[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.39&filename=dhbhaandkmfbffia.png" class="" height="88" width="106" border="0"> [log in to unmask]" alt="imap:[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.40&filename=lglcejopfgfnajaj.png" class="" height="92" width="238" border="0">[log in to unmask]">Mailto:[log in to unmask]