2018-12-13
We have 53rd edition of the 6th year of SmartDrivingCars December 13, We have Liftoff!-120618”>
Comments on: Pilot Program for Collaborative Research on Motor Vehicles With High or Full Driving Automation, Docket NHTSA-2018-0092
J. Levine, Dec 10, “In order to assuage public skepticism of AV technology, it is critical for NHTSA to ensure that automated vehicles, and automated vehicle technology, are safe before allowing their introduction onto public roads. The best way to accomplish this goal is a measured approach that guarantees safety prior to deployment, using the tools and authorities provided by the DOT to NHTSA. Unfortunately, the DOT’s continued myopic commitment to voluntary guidance over effective regulation prevents the development of safeguards that would provide the public with basic and reliable information on the safety of AVs, and places users of American roads at the mercy of unproven technology as unwitting participants in potentially life-threatening experiments…. “ Read more Hmmmm…. Listen to PodCast 71 Alain
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 71-Nader
F. Fishkin, Dec. 13, “When it comes to self driving cars, Ralph Nader says “Not so fast.” The renowned political activist and author takes the government and the industry to task in a super sized Episode 71 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast. Join Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for that and more!” Hmmmm…. Now you can just say “Alexa, play the Smart Driving Cars podcast!” . Ditto with Siri, and GooglePlay. Alain
Real information every week. Lively discussions with the people who are shaping the future of SmartDrivingCars. Want to become a sustaining sponsor and help us grow the SmartDrivingCars newsletter and podcast? Contact Alain Kornhauser at alaink@princeton.edu! Alain
###
SAE International Releases Updated Visual Chart for Its “Levels of Driving Automation” Standard for Self-Driving Vehicles
Staff, Dec 11, “SAE International announces a new visual chart for use with its J3016TM “Levels of Driving Automation” standard that defines the six levels of driving automation, from no automation to full automation….” Read more Hmmmm…. I thought I won.. but no such luck. SAE insists on continuing to make things complicated instead of easy… Level 0 is totally unnecessary. … Level 5 is unachievable… I can’t drive “everywhere under all conditions” There will never be a thing that will drive “everywhere under all conditions” even though the companies that employ SAE members continue to try to have us all fantasize that we can.(totally irresponsible!!)… so Level 5 is equally USELESS. Then Level 1,2 are essentially the same and can be merged by simply using “and/or”; even small children readily understand the subtleties between “eating cake and/or ice cream”. That ends up leaving 3… Safe, Self & Driverless which are each VERY VERY different and should in NO WAY ever be shown using the same color or with merged columns!!!! Please go back to the drawing board SAE, you’re still confusing everyone. Alain
A slashed tire, a pointed gun, bullies on the road: Why do Waymo self-driving vans get so much hate?
R. Randazzo, Dec 11, “A Waymo self-driving van cruised through a Chandler neighborhood Aug. 1 when test driver Michael Palos saw something startling as he sat behind the wheel — a bearded man in shorts aiming a handgun at him as he passed the man’s driveway.
The incident
is one of at
least 21
interactions
documented by
Chandler
police during
the past two
years where
people have
harassed the
autonomous
vehicles and
their human
test drivers.
People have
thrown rocks
at Waymos. The
tire on one
was slashed
while it was
stopped in
traffic. The
vehicles have
been yelled
at, chased and
one Jeep was
responsible
for forcing
the vans off
roads six
times...." [Read more](https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/tech/2018/12/11/waymo-self-driving-vehicles-face-harassment-road-rage-phoenix-area/2198220002/) Hmmmm.... This is very troubling and very serious.
It emphasizes
that it is
necessary to
first create a
"welcoming
environment"
for these
entities;
else,
Driverless
doesn't stand
a chance.
Alain
ChauffeurNet: Learning to Drive by Imitating the Best and Synthesizing the Worst
M. Bansal, Dec 10, “The results on this page depict the ChauffeurNet agent driving in a closed-loop control environment. The teal path depicts the input route, yellow boxes with the faded trail are the positions of the dynamic objects in the scene over the past 1 second, green box is the agent, blue dots are the agent’s past positions and green dots are the predicted future positions which are used by the controller to drive the agent forward….” Read more Hmmmm…. Details are in the original paper which is a must read. “…Recent work by Chen et al. (2015) demonstrated a convolutional net to estimate affordances such as distance to the
preceding car
that could be
used to
program a
controller to
control the
car on the
highway...." Alain
Your Apps Know Where You Were Last Night, and They’re Not Keeping It Secret
J. Valentino, Dec 10, “The millions of dots on the map trace highways, side streets and bike trails — each one following the path of an anonymous cellphone user.
One path
tracks someone
from a home
outside Newark
to a nearby
Planned
Parenthood,
remaining
there for more
than an hour.
Another
represents a
person who
travels with
the mayor of
New York
during the day
and returns to
Long Island at
night. Yet
another leaves
a house in
upstate New
York at 7 a.m.
and travels to
a middle
school 14
miles away,
staying until
late afternoon
each school
day. Only one
person makes
that trip:
Lisa Magrin, a
46-year-old
math teacher.
Her smartphone
goes with
her. An app
on the device
gathered her
location
information,
which was then
sold without
her knowledge.
It recorded
her
whereabouts as
often as every
two seconds,
according to a
database of
more than a
million phones
in the New
York area that
was reviewed
by The New
York Times.
While Ms.
Magrin's
identity was
not disclosed
in those
records, The
Times was able
to easily
connect her to
that dot.
The app
tracked her as
she went to a
Weight
Watchers
meeting and to
her
dermatologist's
office for a
minor
procedure. It
followed her
hiking with
her dog and
staying at her
ex-boyfriend's
home,
information
she found
disturbing...."
[Read more](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/10/business/location-data-privacy-apps.html) Hmmmm.... Little that you didn't already know (or
should have
known), but
the way it is
presented is
really
powerful.
Hiding is as
easy/hard as
turning off
your phone and
going
back/forward
to a copper
land line.
Scared yet???
Also see [How to Stop Apps From Tracking Your Location](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/technology/prevent-location-data-sharing.html)
and [Kids Shouldn't Have to Sacrifice Privacy for Education](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/13/opinion/children-privacy-online.html)
Alain
Tesla’s Elon Musk on ‘60 Minutes’: ‘I do not respect the SEC’
R. Mitchell, Dec 10, “Elon Musk stuck a finger in the SEC’s eye Sunday night on “60 Minutes.”
"I want to be
clear: I do
not respect
the SEC. I do
not respect
them," the
Tesla chief
executive told
Lesley Stahl
on the
nationally
broadcast CBS
news
program....Musk
also said no
one is
reviewing his
tweets, as
called for in
the
settlement.
"The only
tweets that
would have to
be, say,
reviewed would
be if a tweet
had a
probability of
causing a
movement in
the stock,"
Musk said.
"Otherwise,
it's hello 1st
Amendment.
Freedom of
speech is
fundamental."..."
[Read more](https://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-tesla-elon-musk-60-minutes-20181209-story.html) Hmmmm.... Very entertaining . See [60 Minutes episode](https://www.cbs.com/shows/60_minutes/video/ssIdFncaAvDxXuvWKfMbTXvSl1zbceDm/elon-musk-screen-time-ryan-speedo-green/)and
one from [10 years ago](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-whats-changed-in-a-decade-60-minutes-interview/).
Alain
### EVEN ELON MUSK ABUSES TESLA’S AUTOPILOT
J. Stewart, Dec 10, “DO YOU FEEL safe?” Leslie Stahl asked Elon Musk on Sunday’s episode of 60 Minutes, as the scene showed her riding on the freeway with Musk in a red Tesla Model 3. “Yeah,” the CEO answered, settling back into the driver’s seat, his hands clasped together over his stomach, after turning on the car’s semiautonomous driving system. “Now you’re not driving at all,” Stahl said, incredulously, looking over at his feet….Meanwhile, Musk continues to talk up Tesla’s goal of making its cars drive themselves in situations far beyond the highway, with no human oversight or involvement. And so he risks widening the gap between what the car seems to do and what it actually does….” Read more Hmmmm…. the “… no human oversight ….” part is what the SEC or NHTSA or ??? should really come down hard on Elon. That part will cause people to die, not just have to cover their shorts. Alain
Uber manager in March: “We shouldn’t be hitting things every 15,000 miles”
T. Lee, Dec 11, “…Miller quit his job at Uber in March 2018 and went on to lidar startup Luminar. Before he left the company he sent an email to Eric Meyhofer, the leader of Uber’s self-driving car project, about safety problems at the company. The email, which was obtained by The Information’s Amir Efrati, is absolutely scathing…. “A car was damaged nearly every other day in February,” Miller said. “We shouldn’t be hitting things every 15,000 miles.”…“ Read more Hmmmm…. Yipes!! Alain
Tesla’s Navigate on Autopilot takes on LA’s insane freeways
R. Baldwin, Dec 11, “I’m talking and not paying attention to the Model 3’s turn-by-turn navigation when the vehicle’s blinker turns on. Tesla’s “Navigate on Autopilot” turns the wheel to take the off-ramp to an interchange. My hands are on the wheel (as they should be with all driver assist features) and I double-check the traffic around me. No problems to be seen, and I let the car do its thing. It’s smooth, it’s impressive and it’s available to all US Teslas with full self-driving hardware (All Teslas built on or after October 19, 2016, that is)….Tesla’s latest update to driver assistance takes your destination and, just like … CoPilotGPS… , figures out the quickest way to get there. “ Read more Hmmmm…. Actually sounds pretty good; HOWEVER, you MUST remain alert so it really isn’t focused on “Driverless” because there is nothing here that begins to suggest that you don’t need to remain alert. The statement “… Driver-assist features like Autopilot are a helpful way to determine how far along an automaker is in its research towards truly autonomous driving…” is TOTALLY MISLEADING whatever your perception of the meaning of “Autonomous”. NHTSA should sanction him for misleading potential customers, then Elon won’t respect SEC nor NHTSA. Alain
Columbus is first city to offer public self-driving shuttle
V. Wicker, Dec 10, “Monday, Columbus became the first city in the country to offer a self-driving shuttle service to the public.
Smart Columbus
and DriveOhio
unveiled
"Smart
Circuit,"
Ohio's first
self-driving
shuttle and
the country's
first of it's
kind to open
to the
public. "The
first thing
you'll notice
when you go up
to the car is
that there are
sensors on it.
So, lights,
radars and
cameras -- and
those are the
eyes of the
car. So, we
can see in
every
direction all
the time,"
said Edwin
Olson, CEO May
Mobility...."
[Read more](https://www.10tv.com/article/columbus-first-city-offer-public-self-driving-shuttle) Hmmmm.... See the video. Another major step
forward.
Alain
Forget Tesla Buying A GM Factory, Tesla Could Buy GM
K. Lowder, Dec 11, “Currently, Tesla has a market capitalization of $62.71 billion, whereas GM is only valued at $48.58 billion. However, keep in mind that in 2009, GM fell to a value of $1.06 billion. Many economists are starting to predict another recession on the horizon. Moreover, self-driving taxis could take annual global demand for cars from 88 million to a notably smaller fraction of that. Even if that does not occur, the largest car market, China, is rapidly switching to electric. It appears that GM is flatfooted and not prepared for either scenario…. 10 Top Automakers by Market Cap…“ Read more Hmmmm…. Largely tongue-in-cheek but … when you consider Adam Jonas’ $175B cap value for Waymo?!? Alain
High-Tech Degrees and the Price of an Avocado: The Data New York Gave to Amazon
K. Weise, Dec 12, “An avocado at Whole Foods costs $1.25. Columbia University handed out 724 graduate degrees in computer science over the past three years. And 10 potential land parcels in Long Island City are zoned M1-4, for light manufacturing. New York provided all of these data points, and thousands more, to Amazon as part of its successful bid to woo the tech giant to town.
On Monday, [New York City posted online the 253-page proposal it submitted](https://www.dropbox.com/s/60f0fpxavc24izk/NYC_AmazonHQ2Data.pdf?dl=0),
along with New
York State, to
Amazon in
March. ..." [Read more](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/12/technology/amazon-new-york-hq2-data.html) Hmmmm.... Where some of the personal data goes.
Alain
Uber Is Said to File for an I.P.O. as It Races Lyft to a Public Debut
M. Issac, Dec 7, “Uber confidentially filed paperwork on Thursday to go public, according to two people with knowledge of the matter, officially moving toward what is expected to be one of the biggest and most anticipated tech company stock market debuts ever.
The
ride-hailing
company filed
its paperwork
with the
Securities and
Exchange
Commission on
the same day
that its rival
Lyft also
filed for an
offering, said
the people,
who requested
anonymity
because they
were not
authorized to
speak
publicly. Each
company is
rushing to
beat the other
to the public
markets in the
first half of
next year amid
a fair climate
for technology
I.P.O.s and
worries of a
potential
economic
recession...."
[Read more](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/technology/uber-ipo.html) Hmmmm.... I buy high, sell low, so I guess that I'll be
all over this
one. ;-)
Alain
Ethics, Politics, and Whistleblowing in Engineering
R. Milleron, Dec 2018, “The aim of this book is to generate a strong operational ethic in the work of engineers from all disciplines. It provides numerous examples of engineers who sought to meet the highest ethical standards, risking both professional and personal retaliations. In short, it presents the fields of engineering ethics in the context of actual conflict situations on the job, and points to an urgent need for a strong ethical framework for the profession. This book is about engineering students and practitioners truly understanding, valuing, and championing their wider critical role. Ralph Nader, the consumer advocate and champion of engineers, wrote the preface….” Read more Hmmmm…. Really important! Alain
Riding with Waymo One today
Waymo team, Dec 5, “…How does Waymo One work? We’ll start by giving riders access to our app. They can use it to call our self-driving vehicles 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. They can ride across several cities in the Metro Phoenix area, including Chandler, Tempe, Mesa, and Gilbert. Whether it’s for a fun night out or just to get a break from driving, our riders get the same clean vehicles every time and our Waymo driver with over 10 million miles of experience on public roads. Riders will see price estimates before they accept the trip based on factors like the time and distance to their destination…” Read more Hmmmm…. FYI Alain
Half-baked stuff that probably doesn’t
deserve your
time
Check out this hilariously awesome Vespa-inspired electric monowheel
M. Toll, Dec 13, “I think it’s fair to say that Vespa has defined the classic scooter style that has lasted in one form or another for over half a century. Interestingly though, that design hasn’t only been limited to scooters. A Barcelona-based company has borrowed those classic looks for a totally new type of vehicle: an electric monowheel.
And before you
laugh, check
out the specs.
You might be
more
interested in
this thing
than you'd
think… The
Monowheel
Z-One can
reach speeds
as high as 35
km/h (22 mph)
with its
1,000W central
motor. The
built-in 60V
lithium-ion
battery
provides a
range of
between 45-60
km (28-37
miles) on a
single charge.
The entire
device weighs
around 70 kg
(154 lbs) but
can be easily
rolled next to
you and
maneuvered due
to its
self-balancing
nature."
..." [Read more](https://electrek.co/2018/12/13/vespa-inspired-electric-monowheel/) Hmmmm.... ?????? Alain
[Autonomous Vehicles Are Likely to Be a
Slowly-Arriving Commodity](https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomdavenport/2018/12/12/autonomous-vehicles-are-likely-to-be-a-slowly-arriving-commodity/#190c01aa17cc)
T. Davenport, Dec 12, “…One thing that the Honda lacks compared to my Tesla Model 3 is the “Autopilot” feature, for which I believe I paid an extra $5000. This was another bad decision on my part. Autopilot is an amusing feature to play around with, but thinking of it as a true autopilot would be a bad idea…I think Teslas are great cars, but I don’t think any auto manufacturer should charge big dollars for capabilities a car doesn’t really have.” Read more Hmmmm…. Tesla charges for AutoPilot’s capabilities… $5,000 for 15 seconds on some road sections under some conditions. That’s today’s marketplace price/performance. Confusion exists throughout this marketplace. Autonomy’s fantasy is simply no where near equivalent to AutoPilot’s reality. Equating them is equivalent to equating pâté de foie gras with chopped liver or 24 karat gold with gold plating. Very different. What is troubling is that Forbes and the auto companies perpetuate this confusion/conflation for obvious reasons… consumers pay more for fantasies than they do for realities. Alain
C’mon Man!(These folks didn’t get/read the memo)
##
Calendar of Upcoming Events:
###
Annual Princeton SmartDrivingCar Summit
evening May 14 through May 16, 2019
Catalog of Videos of Presentations @ 2nd Annual Princeton SmartDrivingCar SummitPhotos from 2nd Annual Princeton SmartDrivingCar SummitProgram & Links to slides from 2nd Annual Princeton SmartDrivingCar Summit
On the More Technical Side
http://orfe.princeton.edu/~alaink/SmartDrivingCars/Papers/
###
##
Recent
PodCasts
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 70-Brulte
F. Fishkin, Dec. 6, “We have liftoff! Waymo One begins offering a commercial self driving transportation service in the suburbs of Phoenix. How does it work? What’s next? Autonomous Vehicle expert and consultant Grayson Brulte joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin on this episode of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast. Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 69 - Chunka Mui
F. Fishkin, Nov 29, “What will it take for driverless vehicles to become a leading form of transportation? Futurist and author Chunka Mui joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for Episode 69 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast. Plus…Waymo, GM, Amazon and more. Tune in and subscribe! “
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 68 - Dick Mudge
F. Fishkin, Nov 22, “The insurance industry hears about the outlook for automated vehicles. Co-author Dick Mudge joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for Episode 68 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast. Plus…Uber, GM Cruise, Waymo, VW and more. Tune in and subscribe!” Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 66 - Bishop & Zimmerman
F. Fishkin, Nov 8, “Daimler is partnering with Bosch to bring an autonomous ride hailing service to San Jose next year. In this edition, the Director of Engineering at Bosch joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin to outline how it will work. Plus Richard Bishop joins us fresh from an International Task Force on Vehicle Highway Automation in Denmark. And more!” Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 65 - Bernard Soriano, CA DMV
F. Fishkin, Nov 1, “California gives Waymo the green light for fully driverless vehicle testing on public roads and the state’s deputy director of the Department of Motor Vehicles, Bernard Soriano, joins the Smart Driving Cars podcast with the no nonsense details. Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin explore that and more. Tune in and subscribe!” Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 64 - Michael Sena
F. Fishkin, Oct 27, “Here come Waymo’s Taxi Robots: In Episode 64 The Dispatcher publisher Michael Sena joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for a look at Waymo and Tesla. Is it the most misunderstood car company? And some thoughts about MIT’s survey on autonomous vehicle morality choices. Tune in and subscribe!”
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 63- Danny Shapiro, nVIDIA
F. Fishkin, Oct 26, “NVIDIA is out with its first self driving safety report and in Episode 63 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast, NVIDIA’s Director of Automotive, Danny Shapiro, joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin to chat about what is in it…and more. Also…the NJ legislature, with help from Alain…is starting to take action. Plus the latest from Ford. Tune in and subscribe! “
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 62-Jack Stewart, Wired
F. Fishkin, Oct 19, “Why do people keep rear ending self driving cars? It’s the title of the latest article by Senior Writer for Wired, Jack Stewart. This week Jack joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for Episode 62 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast. And there’s more on semi-autonomous safety, Lyft, Uber and Waymo. Tune in and subscribe!” Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 61-Marjory Blumnethal, Rand, Measuring Safety
F. Fishkin, Oct 13, “What’s need to ensure safety in driverless vehicles? In Episode 61 of Smart Driving Cars, Princeton University’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin are joined by the principal investigator for the just completed Rand autonomous vehicle safety project, Marjory Blumenthal. Tune in for that and more on the latest from Waymo, Tesla, Cadillac, Lyft and more.”
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 60-Ed Felten, Princeton & Bryant Walker-Smith, U S. Carolina
F. Fishkin, Oct 6, “With Waymo poised to begin commercial driverless transportation in Arizona…is there reason to worry? In Episode 60 of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast, hosts Alain Kornhauser of Princeton and Fred Fishkin tackle that and more, joined by Ed Felton…a Princeton computer science professor who served as a technology advisor in the Obama administration and Bryant Walker Smith, legal expert from the U. of South Carolina. Tune in and subscribe!… Tune in and subscribe!” Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 59-Alex Roy, Basic Urban Mobility
F. Fishkin, Sept 28 “Basic Universal Mobility? Writer, editor, champion endurance driver and thought leader Alex Roy…joins Princeton University’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for Episode 59 of the Smart Driving Cars podcast. Plus…Alain’s take on Tesla and Elon Musk….Toyota…and more..
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 58-Keith Code, Motorcycles
F. Fishkin, Sept 22 “In this edition of the Smart Driving Cars Podcast, Alain Kornhauser of Princeton University and co-host Fred Fishkin are joined by the founder of the Superbike School, Keith Code. Keith is an instructor, coach, author and researcher into motorcycle safety…and a champion racer. Beyond that….he’s an old high school friend of Alain’s! And there’s more on BMW, Apple, VW and more! . Tune in and subscribe!”
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 55-Larry Burns, Autonomy
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”
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 54-Michael Sena, September Dispatcher
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.”
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 49-Bern Grush, End of Driving
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.”
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 38-Bryant Walker-Smith, Welcome Mat
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!”
Smart Driving Cars Podcast Episode 33-Michael Sena, April Dispatcher
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! “
December 06,
We have
Liftoff!-120618">
Waymo One, the groundbreaking self-driving taxi service, explained
T. Lee, Dec 5,
"Today is a
day that fans
of
self-driving
cars have been
anticipating
for years.
Waymo—widely
seen as the
industry
leader—is
finally
launching its
"Waymo One"
commercial
taxi service
in the Phoenix
metropolitan
area.
The
announcement
fulfills
Waymo's
long-standing
promise to
offer a
commercial
service by the
end of the
year. But the
launch comes
with important
caveats.
Waymo’s Cars Play It Safer After Incidents and ‘Driver Fatigue’
A. Efrati, Nov
27, "Waymo has
only weeks to
meet its
self-imposed
deadline to
launch a
public taxi
service using
fully
automated cars
by the end of
2018. And
right now,
that deadline
looks tough
for the
company to
meet. The
Information
has learned
that within
the past month
or so, due to
concerns about
safety, the
Alphabet
company put
so-called
"safety
drivers" back
behind the
wheel of its
most advanced
prototypes,
ending a
year-long
period in
which those
people
generally sat
in the
passenger or
back seat.
Meanwhile, The
Information
also has
learned that
Waymo is only
testing its
most advanced
prototypes in
about 60
square miles,
or roughly 5%
of the Phoenix
metropolitan
area, say
people with
knowledge of
the
situation...."
[Read more](https://www.theinformation.com/articles/waymos-cars-play-it-safer-after-incidents-and-driver-fatigue) Hmmmm.... No problem. 5% is a very large area in
which to
start. And
having
attendants
onboard is
also OK, in
the
beginning.
Not much would
be saved or
gained by
removing them
(except some
machoism which
has no real
value.). It
is the only
way to go in
the beginning
because safety
is
fundamentally
critical and
much still
needs to
learned and
improved.
Once safety
has been
demonstrated
in this "5%"
the attendants
can disappear
and can move
on to be
attendants in
the next 10%,
and so on...
This is the
responsible
market launch
scenario.
Alain
Market Framework and Outlook for Automated Vehicle Systems R. Mudge, A. Kornhauser, M. Hardison, Nov, 2018 “The surface transportation industry is in the early stages of a series of profound changes, stimulated by the development of increasingly sophisticated driving safety and automation technologies. Considerable uncertainty exists regarding the speed with which these changes will take place and the nature of their impacts on safety, the overall demand for travel, vehicle sales, and vehicle ownership. This report does not attempt to forecast the pace of these changes, instead advancing a list of “trigger points” that might serve as leading indicators of change….
What might
these changes
mean for
actuaries and
the insurance
industry?
Since
Driverless
vehicles will
most likely be
available only
to fleet
operators and
not the
general
public, their
actuarial and
insurance
implication
will differ
substantially
from the
implications
of Safe and
Self
technologies
that will be
on vehicles
purchased by
consumers.
But, will
these vehicles
continue to be
insured in the
same way as
personal
vehicles are
today or will
this practice
change in some
way. For
example, if
the burden of
liability
shifts to the
technology
rather than
the driver,
then should
actuaries
focus on
product
liability
rather than
personal
liability? To
what extent
does
technology
rather than
personal
behavior or
demographics
become the
important link
to liability?
" [Read more](https://www.dropbox.com/s/rbrei4tuxbh7fls/SocietyOfActuaries_market-framework-automated-vehicle2018.pdf?dl=0) Hmmmm.... This is a very good report. Listen to [SmartDrivingCar Podcast 68 with Dick Mudge](https://soundcloud.com/smartdrivingcar/smart-driving-cars-episode-68). (Of
course, I'm
biased. ) Alain
Waymo to Start First Driverless Car Service Next Month T. Randall, “In just a few weeks, humanity may take its first paid ride into the age of driverless cars. Waymo, … is planning to launch the world’s first commercial driverless car service in early December, according to a person familiar with the plans. It will operate under a new brand and compete directly with Uber and Lyft. Waymo is keeping the new name a closely guarded secret until the formal announcement, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the plans haven’t been made public. …
It's a big
milestone for
self-driving
cars, but it
won't exactly
be a
"flip-the-switch"
moment. Waymo
isn't planning
a splashy
media event,
and the
service won't
be appearing
in an app
store anytime
soon,
according to
the person
familiar with
the program.
Instead,
things will
start
small—perhaps
dozens or
hundreds of
authorized
riders in the
suburbs around
Phoenix,
covering about
100 square
miles. ..." [Read more](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-13/waymo-to-start-first-driverless-car-service-next-month) Hmmmm.... Understood that it is a "big milestone",
but I'm tired
reporting
about "gonna"
and want to
report
"didda".
Also, I'm
beginning to
wonder about
the
"Driverless"
aspect of this
launch. Is it "attendant-less" too??? Since this "Service" is supposed to be a
business, then
Driverless
must be
attendant-less,
else it is NOT
a real
business. By
that I mean it
can't scale to
be more than a
niche/toy.
Not even the
giant Alphabet
could afford
to subsidize
anything more
than a
niche/toy and
Adam Jonas
would have to
drop his
valuation to
zero. When
are we going
to see true
Driverless and
not "gonna be
Driverless".
By the way,
how many of
those "10
million
Autonomous
miles driven"
have been
attendant-less?
It is OK if
only a few
have been, but
the business
case requires attendant-less. The marketPlace/wallStreet/adamJonas will require
Waymo to
actually
demonstrate
that it has a
attendant-less
business case,
else zero
valuation..
Alain
We Crash Four Cars Repeatedly to Test the Latest Automatic Braking Safety Systems B. Tingwall, Nov 2018, “The kick-drum thump of a harmless 30-mph shunt into an inflatable faux car rouses the same visceral remorse as a real car crash. The stomach knots with nausea. Mortification burns deep in every muscle. Within seconds, the brain catalogs the near trauma under Things That Should Not Be Repeated, right next to beer pong played with Captain Morgan.
Against our
instincts, we
keep taking
runs at the
balloon car.
We nudge,
punch, and
plow into the
generic
air-filled
Volkswagen
again and
again and
again, not
unlike
American
drivers, who,
in 2016, drove
into the back
ends of other
vehicles 2.4
million times.
The rear-end
collision is
America's
favorite way
to bend
sheetmetal,
accounting for
nearly
one-third of
all
crashes. ...."
[Read more](https://www.caranddriver.com/features/safety-features-automatic-braking-system-tested-explained) Hmmmm.... Bottom line.... AEB DOESN'T WORK!!! Seems
as if someone
should go back
and start
from the
beginning.
The intent
should NOT be
to reduce ...
it should be
to "... essentially
eliminate
the millions
of rear-end
collisions
that happen
each year.
Cars should
NOT be able to
tailgate,
period!!!
These are
public
highways and
tailgaters
should NOT be
enabled to put
others at
risk. Cars
should NOT be
able to cut-in
and cars
should NOT be
able to drive
at an
excessive
speed. If
cars are
misused, the
car maker, the
OEM, should be
liable for
enabling the
car to be
misused, (
unless the
owner has
modified the
car, then the
modifier
should be
liable for
treble
damages).
OEMs have the
knowledge and
capability to
place controls
on their cars
so that they
are NOT
misused. OEMs
should be held
accountable
for not
implementing
those
safeguards.
Alain
A Green Light for Waymo’s Driverless Testing in California Waymo team, Oct 30, “When most people go to the DMV, they hope to leave with a permit that allows them to get behind the wheel. For Waymo, the best news is a permit that allows us to get out from behind the wheel. We’re excited to announce that the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) has just granted Waymo the first permit in the state to begin driverless testing on public roads.
This permit is
the result of
new DMV
regulations
that took
effect in
April, which
allow
companies to
apply for
fully
driverless
testing within
carefully
defined
limits, and is
the product of
nearly ten
years of
testing in
California by
Waymo's team.
It's the first
time that
California has
allowed tests
on public
roads of fully
driverless
cars ― that
is, without a
test driver
sitting in the
driver's
seat. ...This is a major "World's 1st"...
Waymo's test
cars will be
driving in the
shaded area of
the map, which
includes parts
of Mountain
View,
Sunnyvale, Los
Altos, Los
Altos Hills,
and Palo Alto.
We know this
area well: it
includes the
headquarters
for Waymo and
our parent
company,
Alphabet.
Mountain View
is home to
more than a
dozen
autonomous
vehicle
companies, and
has supported
safe testing
for years.
Prior to
expanding the
territory for
driverless
testing, we
will notify
the new
communities
where this
expansion will
occur, and
submit a
request to the
DMV.
The rules of
the road:
Waymo's permit
includes day
and night
testing on
city streets,
rural roads
and highways
with posted
speed limits
of up to 65
miles per
hour. Our
vehicles can
safely handle
fog and light
rain, and
testing in
those
conditions is
included in
our permit. We
will gradually
begin
driverless
testing on
city streets
in a limited
territory and,
over time,
expand the
area that we
drive in as we
gain
confidence and
experience to
expand.
Waymo's test
cars will be
driving in the
shaded area of
the map, which
includes parts
of Mountain
View,
Sunnyvale, Los
Altos, Los
Altos Hills,
and Palo Alto.
We know this
area well: it
includes the
headquarters
for Waymo and
our parent
company,
Alphabet.
Mountain View
is home to
more than a
dozen
autonomous
vehicle
companies, and
has supported
safe testing
for years. ...This is very responsible, Waymo, I'm
certain,
realizes that
Safety is
paramount and
that it is
Waymo/Alphabet/Google
that will be
most "killed"
if safety is
not
paramount.
That doesn't
mean that
there won't be
a crash or
even that no
one will get
killed. There
remain and
will always be
many unknowns;
however, if
the "unknown"
is something
like "we
operated
driverlessly
in a domain
where we had
explicitly
turned off the
emergency
braking
system" then
they'll
deserve to get
"killed". If
instead its: "[never thought that an airbag would do more harm to a kid](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00039562.htm)",
then if we all
learn as much
as we can
about what we
didn't know
and fix it,
then they/we
are likely to
get a pass.
In the initial
deployment,
Waymo and any
of these other
driverless
companies are
placing at
risk
orders-of-magnitude
more than any "non-compliance fine" that could be levied by any public agency for
non-compliance
to some
"safety
threshold".
Adding that it
is non-trivial
to establish a
viable safety
measure,
especially
during the
formative
stage of
development,
the public
sector should
refrain from
establishing
any firm
metric but
continue
impressing
that safety is
paramount. As
for the
industry, it
should stop
lobbying for
the
establishment
of such safety
measures
because no
safety measure
is going to
protect them
from a
financial
backlash that
an
irresponsible
crash will
surely
generate.
They'll never
get [tort limits](https://www.dwyerinsuranceinc.com/faqs/what-is-tort-and-why-would-i-limit-it) and
there is no
way to prevent
Wall Street
from [crushing them relative to their safer competition](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2018/08/07/why-waymo-is-worth-a-staggering-175-billion-even-before-launching-its-self-driving-cars/).
Finally, there
are so few of
these
driverless
companies out
there, each is
watched very
closely and so
far most
players have
been very
responsible.
Each has
earned the
opportunity to
take this next
step.....
Prior to
expanding the
territory for
driverless
testing, we
will notify
the new
communities
where this
expansion will
occur, and
submit a
request to the
DMV.
Waymo's permit
includes day
and night
testing on
city streets,
rural roads
and highways
with posted
speed limits
of up to 65
miles per
hour. Our
vehicles can
safely handle
fog and light
rain, and
testing in
those
conditions is
included in
our permit. We
will gradually
begin
driverless
testing on
city streets
in a limited
territory and,
over time,
expand the
area that we
drive in as we
gain
confidence and
experience to
expand. ...What is rally nice about this is that it
actually
allows Waymo
to deliver
mobility for
general trip
making. It is
not limited to
a narrow
niche. If it
works here it
can work in
many many
places. ( and
importantly
NOT "New York,
where,
pertaining to
personal
mobility, is a
"= 1/Sinatra"
(the inverse
of
Sinatra!!...
[What works in New York can't work anywhere else](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUrUfJW1JGk))
....
Waymo's test
cars will be
driving in the
shaded area of
the map, which
includes parts
of Mountain
View,
Sunnyvale, Los
Altos, Los
Altos Hills,
and Palo Alto.
We know this
area well: it
includes the
headquarters
for Waymo and
our parent
company,
Alphabet.
Mountain View
is home to
more than a
dozen
autonomous
vehicle
companies, and
has supported
safe testing
for years.
Prior to
expanding the
territory for
driverless
testing, we
will notify
the new
communities
where this
expansion will
occur, and
submit a
request to the
DMV. ...
very
responsible of
them...
...." [Read more](https://medium.com/waymo/a-green-light-for-waymos-driverless-testing-in-california-a87ec336d657) Hmmmm.... Comments in line above. This is
another major
first to
creating a
serious
mobility
machine that
can provide
mobility to
all, but
especially to
those that
have been
relegated to
providing
their own
mobility
because public
transit's
conventional
mobility
machines are
simply
incapable of
providing an
acceptable
service unless
there are many
people who
want to travel
between a very
few places at
about the same
time
throughout a
typical work
day. Except
for a very few
places
(Manhattan)
and a few
corridors
conventional
transit is
simply not the
way most
people in the
US have chosen
to have
mobility
enhance their
quality of
life. There
is a reason
why transit's
conventional
mobility
machines serve
less than 5%
of the
nation's daily
trips, many
(most??) of
which would
have been take
by car had the
individual
been able to
afford a car
or been able
to drive a
car.
Countless
others forgo
the quality of
life
improvement
that a trip
would have provided
simply
because,
again, they
either can't
afford a car
or can't
operate a
car. It is
these most
mobility
disadvantaged
for which this
"Green Light"
is so
potentially
life-changing.
These
driverless
mobility
machines have
the
opportunity to
deliver to
this most
mobility
disadvantaged
community a
quality of
service that
is comparable
to that taken
for granted by
those that are
rich enough to
own a car and
capable enough
to drive that
car.
Again, that
mobility
opportunity is
life changing
to that
community,
which
includes, the
too old who
really
shouldn't be
driving, the
too poor who
can't afford
to live in the
gentrified
"transit-oriented
developments"
and have been
abandoned by
transit, (if
transit ever
severed them
in the first
place), the
suburban and
rural poor
that have
never been
served by
transit and
the too young
who don't have
parents to
chauffeur them
around at the
drop of a
hat..
Hopefully, it
is this
community that
Waymo will
target from
the very
beginning with
this most
wonderful
"mobility
machine" that
they've
developed so
responsibly.
Providing
another
mobility
option to
those whose
most
challenging
mobility
decision has
been which
car(s) to
leave in the
driveway/garage
today. To
serve them,
you'll
probably have
to offer them
a
single-occupant
ride. By
doing that you
not only don't
really do them
any great
favor, but you
actually
deliver
negative
societal
benefits
because you
increase VMT
relative to
them driving
themselves
(which is
probably the
bottom line on
what Waymo has
been doing to
this point in
Chandler,
AZ).
Unfortunately,
the area that
Waymo has
geo-fenced to
begin with in
California may
not have many
mobility
disadvantaged,
but you don't
need many to
start. I urge
Waymo to seek
out those most
mobility
disadvantaged
individuals
and focus its
deployment to
serve their
mobility needs
on a priority
basis. It is
a shame and a
missed
opportunity
that
California
DMCV and PUC
didn't also
require, in
return for the
approval to
utilize
California's
public roads
for the
provision of a
driverless
mobility
service, a
quid pro quo
"Common
Carriage
Obligation"
that the
service
prioritize the
delivery of
mobility to
the most
mobility
disadvantaged.
The excess
capacity is
readily
available to
serve everyone
else,
including
Alain and the
1%ers. Alain
M. Sena, Nov.
2018, "IN
THIS ISSUE:
Ready or Not,
Here Comes the
Waymo Taxi
Robot
.......... 2 ...a must read...but..."...Alphabet is definitely not in the
altruism
business..."
Tesla Inc.: The Most Misunderstood Car Company ………. 7 …a must read…especially: “…Looking for love in all the wrong places…”
United Nations
Climate Panel
Issues Its
Report
.............
13 ...a must read... "...How do you love your toast?.."
Dispatch
Central
..............................................................
16 ...interesting...
Senator says
BEV's not
paying fair
share
............................
16 ...a must read...
Stockholm
unwelcomes
dockless
bicycles
..........................
16 ...implication that new mobility must be
welcomed, else
they have no
chance of
succeeding...
Driving with
one hand tied
behind your
back
.....................
17
The first
experience
house was in
Paris
..............................
17
IKEA Imagines
Roaming Rooms
for Its
Furniture
............
18 ...Half-Baked...
Musings of a
Dispatcher:
Pollyanna
Predictions
.............
20x ...nice..`" [Read more](C:/Users/alaink/Dropbox%20%28Princeton%29/web/orfe.princeton.edu/public_html/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/The%20Dispatcher_November%202018.pdf) Hmmmm.... Also listen to[PodCast Episode 6](https://soundcloud.com/smartdrivingcar/smart-driving-cars-episode-64)[4](https://soundcloud.com/smartdrivingcar/smart-driving-cars-episode-64)
with
Michael Sena.
Alain
New Jersey Pending Legislation re: Autonomous Vehicles
Oct 16, Establishes fully autonomous vehicle pilot program A4573 Sponsors: Zwicker (D16); Benson (D14)
Oct 16, EstablishesNew Jersey Advanced Autonomous Vehicle Task Force AJR164 Sponsors: Benson (D14); Zwicker (D16); Lampitt (D6)
Oct 16, [Directs MVC to establish driver's license endorsement for autonomous vehicles A4541](https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bills/A5000/4541_I1.PDF)
Sponsors:
Zwicker (D16);
Benson (D14);
Lampitt
(D6)..." [Read more](https://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/NVIDIA-Self-Driving-Safety-Report-2018.pdf) Hmmmm.... Things are beginning to move in New
Jersey. Alain
Audio Recording of Assembly Science, Innovation and Technology - Monday, October 22, 2018 - 10:00:00 AM Nvidia delivers its self-driving car safety report to the feds
A. Hawkins,
Oct 23,
"Nvidia, one
of the world's
best known
manufacturers
of computer
graphics
cards,
released its
autonomous
driving safety
report on
Tuesday. The
Santa
Clara-based
company, which
for several
years has been
engaged in a
high-stakes
venture to
build the
"brains" that
power
self-driving
cars for major
automakers
like Volvo,
Volkswagen,
and
Mercedes-Benz
parent
Daimler, is
only the fifth
company to
delivery its
voluntary
safety report
to the US
National
Highway
Traffic Safety Administration....
The 20-page
safety report
highlights the
"four pillars"
of Nvidia's
approach to
autonomous
driving
technology: AI
chips like
Pegasus and
Xavier that
power the
vehicles'
operations;
data centers
to process the
massive
amounts of
data produced
by fleets of
self-driving
cars; the
company's
Drive
Constellation
simulation
software to
enable virtual
world testing;
and adherence
to federal and
international
safety
standards....
Nvidia is only
the fifth
company to
release its
safety report
under the
voluntary
guidelines
created by the
US Department
of
Transportation...."
[Read more](https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/23/18011002/nvidia-self-driving-car-safety-report-nhtsa) Hmmmm.... Also listen to [PodCast Episode 63](https://soundcloud.com/smartdrivingcar/smart-driving-cars-episode-63)
with Danny
Shapiro.
Alain
WHY PEOPLE KEEP REAR-ENDING SELF-DRIVING CARS J. Stewart, Oct 18, “The self-driving-car crashes that usually make the news are, unsurprisingly, either big and smashy or new and curious…. Look at every robocar crash report filed in California, though, and you get a more mundane picture—but one that reveals a striking pattern. In September of this year, for example, three self-driving cars were sideswiped. Another three were rear-ended. One of them by a bicycle. And that’s not even the strangest one: In June, an AV operated by General Motors’ self-driving arm, Cruise, got bumped in the back—by a human driving another Cruise….
As this chart
shows, GM's
Cruise has
filed by far
the most
reports in
2018, but
don't read too
much into
that. If the
pattern holds
from 2016 to
2017 (we won't
have full 2018
numbers until
early next
year), Waymo
has been
dialing down
its testing in
California in
favor of
Arizona.
Cruise has
been ramping
it up and does
its driving in
the chaos of
San Francisco.
Waymo has the
second-most
collisions,
followed by
Zoox, a
startup that
also tests in
the city.....
These reports,
written and
filed by the
companies
running the
cars, consist
mostly of
check boxes,
with a line or
two explaining
what happened.
Some detail
thankfully
freaky,
presumably
rare
incidents:
"The Cruise AV
was struck by
a golf ball
from a nearby
golf course."
Some reveal
what we'll
call
exasperation
on the part of
other road
users: "The
driver of the
taxi exited
his vehicle,
approached the
Cruise AV, and
slapped the
front
passenger
window,
causing a
scratch."
Other sorts of
crashes happen
more
frequently.
Drilling down
into the data
shows that
autonomous
vehicles being
rear-ended
accounts for
28 of the 49
filed reports,
nearly
two-thirds....
But combine
that with the
fact that the
computer was
in charge in
22 of those 28
rear-end
crashes, and
you have
reason to
believe that
the AVs are
doing
something that
makes cars
behind them
more likely to
hit them.
Maybe that's
driving
herkily-jerkily
(as we
experienced in
a Cruise car
in San
Francisco in
November
2018), or
stopping for
no clear
reason (as we
experienced in
an Uber car in
Pittsburgh
last year).
That's not
necessarily a
bad thing. It
indicates a
conservative
focus on
safety: Better
to stop for a
fire hydrant
than run down
a preschooler.
But part of
being a good
driver is
behaving in a
way others
expect, which
doesn't
include
constantly
stamping on
the
brakes..." [Read more](https://www.wired.com/story/self-driving-car-crashes-rear-endings-why-charts-statistics/) Hmmmm.... This is a really good article and
deserves your
full
attention. A
couple of
comments...
As is
mentioned, not
enough about
the
operational
environment is
reported to
really
indicate if it
is the
automated
operational
aspects that
are inducing
the crashes.
There is a
wide variance
in the way
people drive.
Many of us get
upset with
people who
don't drive
the way we
drive and
sometimes we
run into the
back of them.
We report to
the police
that we do
this about [1.7 million times a year](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2015/06/08/there-are-about-1-7-million-rear-end-collisions-on-u-s-roads-each-year-heres-how-to-stop-them/?utm_term=.36a6dfac8a7a).
(Who knows how
many there
would be if
the reporting
was as
stringent as
California's?).
There are
about [3.2 Billion vehicle miles traveled per year](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M12MTVUSM227NFWA).
This implies
that the
""Police"
reported
rear-ender-rate"
is about one
per 2 million
miles driven,
which is
roughly an
order of
magnitude
better than
the
"California AV
reported
rear-ender-rate".
But given the
likely
differential
reporting
between the
national
number and the
California AV
number and
that a large
part of the
National VMTs
are driven in
domains where
few
rear-ending
crashes occur
(cruising at
higher speeds
in not so
congested
"freeways"),
the difference
may in fact be
negligible
when "apples"
were really
compared to
"apples".
What is not
said, that is
really be
clear, is that
these
SmartDrivingCars,
when operating
using their
automated
driving
systems, DON'T
rear-end
people-driven
cars! That
is the real
message
here! And,
by the way,
why do
people-driven
cars still
rear-end other
cars???? Why
haven't the
OEMs developed
Automated
Emergency
Braking
systems that
actually work
(definition of
work: don't
let the car
crash into
things in the
lane ahead!).
Here they
(OEMs) are
working
feverishly to
sell us
visions of
being able to
take our hands
off the wheel
and feet off
the pedals so
we can [text](http://www.autonews.com/article/20170220/OEM11/302209948/distracted-driving-defies-global-enforcement-efforts),
[watch movies](https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2015%2F11%2F19%2F12%2F2E987B2E00000578-3325262-image-a-51_1447934857181.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fsciencetech%2Farticle-3325262%2FSit-relax-Volvo-unveils-concept-interior-self-driving-car-reclining-seats-pop-TV-screens.html&docid=qnaDpgFacBxZlM&tbnid=NjOMBQqjwRtwjM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwjd_PO4xJLeAhVJzVMKHfUmBrMQMwg_KAAwAA..i&w=634&h=380&bih=1197&biw=1165&q=watching%20movies%20%20in%20mercedes%20self-driving%20car&ved=0ahUKEwjd_PO4xJLeAhVJzVMKHfUmBrMQMwg_KAAwAA&iact=mrc&uact=8)and
[sleep](http://www.sleepreviewmag.com/2018/09/sleep-getting-destination-volvos-360c-concept-car/),
yet they
haven't even
developed the
system that
keeps the car
from plowing
into a [firetruck that's parked in the lane ahead](https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-why-crash-radar/) or [rear-end a GM/Cruise car](https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/autonomousveh_ol316+) as
it's trying to
make its way
through San
Francisco
obeying
traffic laws.
[C'mon OEMs.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky5QlDVEFEM) You
can do this.
Alain [Measuring Automated Vehicle Safety: Forging a Framework](https://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/RAND_MeasuringVehicleSafety-A_Framework.pdf)
L.
Fraade-Blanar,
Oct 2018 , "In
this report,
we develop a
framework for
measuring
safety in AVs
that could be
used broadly
by companies,
policymakers,
and the
public. We
considered how
to define
safety for
AVs, how to
measure safety
for AVs, and
how to
communicate
what is
learned or
understood
about AVs.
Given AVs'
limited total
on-road
mileage
compared with
conventional
vehicles, we
consider
options for
proxy
measurements—i.e.,
factors that
might be
correlated
with safety.
We also
explore how
safety
measurements
could be made
in simulation
and on closed
courses. The
closely held
nature of AV
data limits
the details of
what is made
public or
shared between
companies and
with the
government.
The report
focuses on
identifying
key concepts
and
illuminating
the kinds of
measurements
that might be
made and
communicated....
"The success
of autonomous
vehicles
requires
public trust.
Right now,
autonomous
vehicle
development is
happening
along
different
paths by
competing
developers,''
said RAND
researcher
Marjory
Blumenthal.
"This
framework can
be a common
reference
point for all
developers and
can lead to
safer
vehicles."
The research
is sponsored
by Uber's
Advanced
Technologies,
which
approached
RAND in summer
2017 for help
in creating
such a
framework. It
builds upon
past RAND
research into
AV safety and
other trends.
" [Read more](https://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/RAND_MeasuringVehicleSafety-A_Framework.pdf) Hmmmm....This is a very good report on a very
challenging
subject, that
of trying to
use
quantitative
measures to
obtain a
subjective and
perceptive
concept of
safety and
fear. I
suspect that
even though we
haven't had a
[plane crash](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_commercial_aircraft#2018) in
the [US since Feb 12, 2009](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407),
some people
remain afraid
to fly. That
said,
establishing a
specific
measure(s), of
course, leaves
one open to
gamesmanship.
Everyone
agrees that
VMT is not the
right rate
simply because
VMT is not a
constant
measure of
challenge.
Most VMTs are
extremely
simple, many
are hard and
some are
really
difficult.
Unfortunately,
the toughest
may well be
those that
we've neither
experienced
nor imagined.
That
recognition
leads to some recommendations that don't seem to be included in the report. One has
to do with not
only the
classification
of the VMT
scenarios but
also their
discovery and
subsequently
the
sharing/publication
of their
discovery to
the AV
community at
large. This
may well be
one of the
legacies of
the
Uber-Elaine
Herzberg
Crash. The
scenario,
comprising of
the short
distance the
Uber car
traveled in
the 6 seconds
prior to that
crash, is now
part of
everyone's
"Challenging
VMTs".
One of the
troubling
elements of
this report is
that it deals
with the SAE
levels. This
is really
unfortunate.
The SAE levels
do not
contribute to
a better
understanding
of safety.
The attention
should focus
on the
mobility that
is trying to
be achieved.
In this case
it is
Driverless
mobility
within a
specified
domain.
Whether that
domain might
eventually
become
infinite
(everywhere)
is
irrelevant.
Safety is
always within
some domain.
Airplanes are
not safe if
they are flown
under water.
Of course
there are
domains where
driverless
vehicles will
not be safe.
Clarifying the
domains where
the technology
is safe, or is
being tested
to determine
its level of
safety is
really
important and
ensuring that
the vehicles
do not operate
outside of
their safety
domain is an
extremely
important
element of
establishing
"safety".
Another
element that
exists here is
that of
"sampling
bias". Using
any amorphous
measure such
as VMT invites
sample bias
because some
VMTs are so
simple that a
biased
accumulation
of those VMTs
leads to one
perception,
whereas a
biased
accumulation
of other VMTs
leads to
another, quite
different
perception.
In the report,
here is not a
realization
that "Wall
Street"
(corporate
survival)
fundamentally
depends on
Safety. It
does so in
aviation.
Historically
plane crashes
have inflicted
extremely
heavy
penalties on
airline
companies.
Uber suffered
enormously
financially
because of the
Elaine
Herzberg
crash. The
role of Wall
Street in
establishing
and
maintaining
safety needs
to be included
in this
discussion.
Alain Correction: This report was originally incorrectly
attributed to
T. Lee. It is
a Rand Corp
report
authored by
Laura
Fraade-Blanar,
Marjory S.
Blumenthal,
James M.
Anderson,
Nidhi Kalra.
Alain
Fully driverless Waymo taxis are due out this year, alarming critics T. Lee, Oct 1, “Waymo, Google’s self-driving car project, is planning to launch a driverless taxi service in the Phoenix area in the next three months. It won’t be a pilot project or a publicity stunt, either. Waymo is planning to launch a public, commercial service—without anyone in the driver’s seat. And to date, Waymo’s technology has gotten remarkably little oversight from government officials in either Phoenix or Washington, DC.
If a company
wants to sell
a new airplane
or medical
device, it
must undergo
an extensive
process to
prove to
federal
regulators
that it's
safe.
Currently,
there's no
comparable
requirement
for
self-driving
cars. Federal
and state laws
allow Waymo to
introduce
fully
self-driving
cars onto
public streets
in Arizona
without any
formal
approval
process. ... Maybe, but automobiles weren't regulated
until long
after Henry
Ford and we're
barely
approaching
the "Henry
Ford" stage of
the Driverless r/evolution.... That's not an oversight. It
represents a
bipartisan
consensus in
Washington
that strict
regulation of
self-driving
cars would do
more harm than
good. ... rightfully so because this is so new that
we don't know
what to do.
It is still at
such a small
scale that
even if it
began to fall
apart
completely not
much harm
could be done..
" If you think
about what
would be
required for
some
government
body to
examine the
design of a
self-driving
vehicle and
decide if it's
safe, that's a
very difficult
task," says Ed
Felten, a
Princeton
computer
scientist who
advised the
Obama White
House on
technology
issues.
This hands-off
regulatory
approach
drives some
safety
advocates
crazy....Mary
"Missy"
Cummings, an
engineering
professor at
Duke, agrees.
"I don't think
there should
be any
driverless
cars on the
road," she
tells Ars. "I
think it's
unconscionable
that no one is
stipulating
that testing
needs to be
done before
they're put on
the road."...
But there is
no formal
process
requiring the
company to
submit
information
about its
technology and
test results
to regulators
in Phoenix or
Washington.
...
Even safety
advocates like
Chase and
Cummings don't
necessarily
want to see
cars subjected
to the kinds
of
comprehensive
regulations
imposed on
aircraft and
medical device
makers. But
they'd like to
see the
government
take a more
active role in
testing
self-driving
cars—before
they're
allowed on
public roads.
But
Princeton's Ed
Felten
questions
whether that's
realistic. He
points out
that there are
unique
challenges to
testing
self-driving
cars...
And while
Cummings told
me that "there
has never been
any kind of
real-world
testing" of
Waymo's cars,
that doesn't
seem quite
fair to
Waymo. ...
Ultimately,
the only way
to test how a
self-driving
car will
perform on
real public
streets is to
test them on
real public
streets.
If formal
FDA-style
testing isn't
realistic,
what could
regulators do
instead?
Bryant Walker
Smith
advocates what
he calls a
"trustworthy
company" model
for regulating
self-driving
cars. Instead
of writing
prescriptive, technology-focused standards for driverless cars, he says, regulators
should focus
on validating
car companies'
own processes
for developing
and testing
driverless
cars. Smith
would like to
"have
governments
say: are these
companies
making a
credible case?
Are they
candidly
communicating?
Does the
company
support their
assertions?"
"Regulation is
not just a
rule or a
prospective
approval,"
Smith notes.
"Regulation is
all of the
tools
available to
governments:
investigations,
inquiries,
recalls,
prosecutions
for
misrepresentations
to
governments."
But the
company hasn't
released much
data to back
up its safety
claims. We
know Waymo has
logged
millions of
miles on
Arizona roads,
but we know
very little
about how its
vehicles have
performed.
Waymo needs to
not just build
safe
technology,
but also
convince the
public that
its technology
is safe. Being
more
transparent
about both its
technology and
its testing
efforts could
help." [Read more](https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/10/waymo-wont-have-to-prove-its-driverless-taxis-are-safe-before-2018-launch/) Hmmmm.... What is not pointed out is that
"Wall Street"
is serving as
the ultimate
safety
regulator in a
way that is
much more
draconian than
any "FAA",
FDA",
"watchdog" or
"Congress".
Last year
Waymo and Uber
were thought
by many to be
essentially
neck-to-neck
in the
driverless car
race. Both
valued at
about $75B.
Today Uber is
struggling to
maintain its
$75B valuation
while [Adam Jonas has pegged Waymo at $175B](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2018/08/07/why-waymo-is-worth-a-staggering-175-billion-even-before-launching-its-self-driving-cars/).
By far the
biggest
difference in
accolades
between the
two companies
is that one
had one crash
that killed a
pedestrian and
the other
didn't. The
"Wall Street"
lesson of a
$100B
implication of
just one fatal
crash is not
lost on anyone
in this
industry.
Safety is
fundamentally
recognized as
an absolutely
necessary
condition to
being a player
in this
emerging form
of mobility.
Alain [FORGET UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME. WE NEED UNIVERSAL BASIC MOBILITY](https://www.2025ad.com/latest/alex-roy-driverless-cars-universal-basic-mobility/)
A. Roy, Sept 5, “…THE ORIGIN OF UNIVERSAL BASIC MOBILITY (UBM). UBM is inspired by Universal Basic Income (UBI), which has long been debated as a solution for a variety of societal ills…
Freedom of
movement has
never been
accompanied
with a right
to mobility.
Governments
built
infrastructure,
but you still
had to buy
your own horse
or car. As
population
density rose
and traffic
worsened,
modern states
invested in
more roads,
more trolleys,
more buses and
more trains,
creating an
informal
mobility
compact
between
governments
and their
citizens — we
will provide
means of
transporting
you more
efficiently
than you can
transport
yourselves.
Unfortunately,
people move
and cities
grow faster
than
governments
can build, and
people will
solve
transportation
needs as they
see fit.
Hence, the
oldest cities
in the United
States are
dominated by
struggling
public transit
systems, and
the newest
ones are
choking on the
cars around
which they
grew....
Freedom of
movement is
limited
wherever the
government/citizen
mobility
compact is
stressed or
broken. We see
this "mobility
underclass" in
the public
transportation
deserts in and
around
numerous
cities. The
mobility
underclass has
few options;
if they can
afford a car,
they
contribute to
broader
traffic and
infrastructure
problems. If
they can't,
they are often
forced into
unregulated
private/shared
options below
the radar of
even the
largest and
most ambitious
transportation
network
start-ups.
A parent who
spends four
hours a day
commuting
means a child
deprived of
critical
family time, a
worker too
tired to be
effective, a
human being
without
downtime....
A growing
number of the
mobility
underclass are
falling into
"structural
immobility" —
the state in
which lack of
mobility
limits their
ability to
obtain and
keep jobs,
access basic
services,
contribute to
society or
maintain a
reasonable
quality of
life. The gap
between
freedom of
movement and
affordable
mobility
options
creates a
self-perpetuating
system of
economic,
social and
emotional
loss,
depriving
society of
countless
productive
citizens..." [Read more](https://www.2025ad.com/latest/alex-roy-driverless-cars-universal-basic-mobility/) Hmmmm.... As you know I love the "elevator
analogy". One
can argue that
Elevators
provide a high
level of UBM
in tall
buildings.
(The stairs
offer a very
low
(unacceptable
level) of UBM
(fine for a
couple of
floors, but
anything
higher is a
non-starter). Walking/(bicycles, electric skate boards) in cities are like the stairs.
Great for
short
distances
but... Up to
now the car
has been the
elevator.
Unfortunately
we've had to
own our own,
drive it
ourselves
because we
couldn't
afford a
chauffeur,
and only use
it for
ourselves
(never share
rides that
would leave a
car or a
couple of cars
at home
because we
didn't know
anyone else
had a similar
mobility need
for this trip
at this time).
Luckily in
buildings,
elevators are
not owned by
individuals
(except the
Donald). They
are made
available by
the land
owners (owners
of the floors)
and made
available to
anyone 24/7 so
that the floor
owners can
collect rent
on the floors
that they
own. The
elevators
provide high
quality UBM in
tall
buildings.
Horizontally,
aTaxis could
be offered and
operated just
like
elevators.
Often used by
single
individuals
simply because
no one else is
going up. But,
if the demand
warrants, the
elevator is
readily shared
by those going
in the same
direction
(same narrow
wedge) at
about the same
time. Anyone
can use them
any time. How
they are
priced/subsidized
is a public
policy
decision. No
reason why
property
owners
wouldn't make
them be very
affordable
especially if
it gets people
to visit/use
their
facilities/land.
Thoughts??? Alain
BMW Develops New Insurance Concept, Aims at Future of Car Insurance G. Nica, Sept 17, “With the BMW Group’s technical know-how and Swiss Re’s expertise as a reinsurer, an algorithm has been developed that is capable of representing the complex effects of driver assistance systems on the safety of BMW vehicles as a score. This score facilitates calculation of an individual vehicle-specific insurance premium….” Read more Hmmmm…. Wow, can this really be true. I’ve been calling for this for at least 4 years. Have they really “developed” the algorithm?? Hope they publish it. I’d love to see it. To what extent does expected liability become independent of expected driver behavior? How does improvement in “BMW vehicle score” correlate with both reduced insurance premiums and the incremental cost of the incremental Driver Assistance System. What “Driver Assistance System” yields the Minimum { insuranceCost + incrementalCapitalizedSafetySystemCost} for each model??? Can’t wait to learn the details. Hope it is not all smoke & mirrors. Alain
Self-Driving Cars Will Keep Getting Better Forever D. Silver, Sept. 4, “ Evans raises a particularly interesting question about autonomy: “what winner takes all effects apply?”
Waymo, which
recently
surpassed 9
million miles
driven
autonomously,
started
working on
autonomous
vehicles in
2009, years
before many
current
competitors.
That head
start has
allowed them
to rack up far
more
autonomous
miles than
other
companies (the
next closest
program
appears to be
Uber's
now-paused
Advanced
Technology
Group, with 2
million
autonomous
miles)....
Similarly,
Tesla has sold
hundreds of
thousands of
Autopilot-enabled semi-autonomous cars. Collectively, Autopilot-enabled vehicles have
driven
approximately
1.5 billion
miles,
providing
Tesla with a
dataset no
other company
has.
With those
kinds of
leads, a
question
arises of
whether Waymo
and Tesla have
already won
the market?
...." [Read more](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidsilver/2018/09/04/self-driving-cars-will-keep-getting-better-forever/#6a6a4801217d) Hmmmm.... Very good question!! What do you
think? Alain
Customers Died. Will That Be a Wake-Up Call for China’s Tech Scene?
Waymo’s Big Ambitions Slowed by Tech Trouble A. Efrati, Aug 28, “HANDLER, Ariz.—Alphabet’s Waymo unit is a worldwide leader in autonomous vehicle development for suburban environments. It has said it would launch a driverless robo-taxi service to suburban Phoenix residents this year. Yet its self-driving minivan prototypes have trouble crossing the T-intersection closest to the company’s Phoenix-area headquarters here.
Two weeks ago,
Lisa Hargis,
an
administrative
assistant who
works at an
office a
stone's throw
from Waymo's
vehicle depot,
said she
nearly hit a
Waymo Chrysler
Pacifica
minivan
because it
stopped
abruptly while
making a right
turn at the
intersection.
"Go!" she
shouted
angrily, she
said, after
getting stuck
in the
intersection
midway through
her left turn.
Cars that had
been driving
behind the
Waymo van also
stopped. "I
was going to
murder
someone," she
said.
The hesitation
at the
intersection
is one of many
flaws evident
in Waymo's
technology,
say five
people with
direct
knowledge of
the issues in
Phoenix. More
than a dozen
local
residents who
frequently
encounter one
of the
hundreds of
Waymo test
vehicles
circulating in
the area
complained
about sudden
moves or
stops. The
company's
safety drivers—individuals who sit in the driver's seat—regularly have to take
control of the
wheel to avoid
a collision or
potentially
unsafe
situation, the
people
said....
In reality,
the vast
majority of
Waymo's test
cars continue
to use safety
drivers.
Typically, the
cars that
drive without
a person at
the wheel have
been in
relatively
small
residential
areas of
Chandler,
Ariz., where
there is
little
traffic,
according to
people
familiar with
the program.
And these
vehicles are
monitored
closely by
remote
operators that
can help the
cars when they
run into
issues. (Waymo
last week told
the Verge that
its first
driverless
taxis would
include a
"chaperone"
from Waymo who
would sit in
the
cars.)..." [Read more](https://www.theinformation.com/articles/waymos-big-ambitions-slowed-by-tech-trouble?jwt=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJhbGFpbmtAcHJpbmNldG9uLmVkdSIsImV4cCI6MTU2NzA0MjA2NiwibiI6IkFsYWluIEtvcm5oYXVzZXIiLCJzY29wZSI6WyJzaGFyZSJdfQ.ejgpq5onTwAK-r-lt4znaE6J-t9mg7V6RGPv0BY7nIE&unlock=dbcf3fa59ce34aa1) Hmmmm.... As I've been saying, we are still
at the very
beginning....
0.001 degrees
Kelvin. Plus "others/non-users" will never like them. Just this morning I honked at
the driver in
front of me
who passed up
a gap to make
an unprotected
left turn. I
had to wait
for a whole
cycle!! I
hate every car
that drives on
Cleveland Lane
in front of my
house. I want
that street
all for
myself. I
hate buses. I
hate trucks.
I hate
everything and
everyone but
me. This is
just human
nature.
Little respect
for others.
Heck, I'm the
only good
driver out
there. The innuendos are not surprising. We'll
just have to
grin and bear
them as we do
with all of
the
conventional
cars running
around out
there.
On a more
serious note,
this reality
demonstrates
that we may
need
regulation/legislation
that
explicitly
protects the
rights of
driverless
cars to share
the public
road
infrastructure.
We do this for
bicycles,
motorcycles
and in a way
even for
trucks and
buses. Also,
buses, and
other vehicles
today have
signs on their
backs that
state "This
vehicle stops
at all RR
crossings"
because it
differs from
normal car
behavior.
I suggest that
Waymo and all
that are
testing
driverless
vehicles on
city streets
place a sign
on the back of
each
vehicles:"This
Car Obeys All
Traffic Laws
and Rules.
You should too! Alain
Augus26, 2018
T. Wolverton, Aug 22, “The CEO of Zoox has left in a management shake-up at the the high-profile, well-funded, and idiosyncratic self-driving car startup.
Zoox has
already
started
searching for
a replacement
for Tim
Kentley-Klay,
who cofounded
the Silicon
Valley-based
company, a
source close
to Zoox told
Business
Insider. In
the meantime,
it has named
board member
Carl Bass as
its executive
chairman and
cofounder
Jesse Levinson
as its
president, the
source said.
Bass is the
former CEO of
Autodesk.
Kentley-Klay
confirmed his
ouster in a
statement
posted on his
Twitter
account.
Zoox's board
fired him
"without a
warning, cause
or right of
reply," he
said in the
statement.
"Today was
Silicon Valley
up to its
worst tricks,"
he said.
"Rather than
working
through the
issues in an
epic startup
for the win,"
he continued,
"the board
chose a path
of fear,
optimizing for
a little money
in hand at the
expense of
profound
progress for
the universe."
Along with his
statement,
Kentley-Klay
posted a pair
of charts
comparing Zoox
to its chief
rivals —
Google spinoff
Waymo, Uber,
and GM-owned
Cruise. The
charts
essentially
assert that
Zoox has made
more progress
with its
technology for
less money
than its
rivals... A
native of
Australia,
Kentley-Klay
had no
background
automobile
engineering or
artificial
intelligence
before
starting Zoox,
according to a
recent
Bloomberg
profile.
Instead, he
had worked in
online
advertising.."
[Read more](https://www.businessinsider.com/zoox-ousts-ceo-tim-kentley-klay-2018-8?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_content=10ThingsSAI&pt=385758&ct=Sailthru_BI_Newsletters&mt=8&utm_campaign=Post%20Blast%20%28sai%29:%2010%20things%20in%20tech%20you%20need%20to%20know%20today&utm_term=10%20Things%20In%20Tech%20You%20Need%20To%20Know%20-%20Engaged%2C%20Active%2C%20Passive%2C%20Disengaged)Hmmmm....
Must be trying
to protect its
$3.2B
valuation and
avert an
"Uberism" (a
single
valuation-changing
irresponsible
incident) .
Alain
August 18,
2018
Uber’s Losses Mount at Self-Driving Car Unit A. Efrati, Aug 15, “Uber has been spending between $125 million and $200 million a quarter on its self-driving car unit over the past 18 months, The Information has learned, equivalent to between 15% and 30% of the company’s quarterly losses. The previously undisclosed spending highlights the financial burden that self-driving car development has imposed on Uber and why CEO Dara Khosrowshahi is under pressure to decide what to do about it.
Some investors
have told Uber
officials that
it may be wise
to divest the
self-driving
car unit, said
a person
familiar with
the issue.
Uber has
invested least
$2 billion in
the unit over
the past three
years. Yet the
company hasn't
yet come up
with a clear
path to
commercializing
the technology
it has
developed.
The group's
quarterly cash
burn of $1
million to $2
million per
day has been
particularly
high during
quarters when
Uber paid for
expensive
hardware like
cars and
sensors that
are attached
to the cars,
said a person
with knowledge
of the data.
The company
has tried to
reduce some
expenses by
withdrawing
operations
from Arizona
and cutting a
development
effort for
self-driving
trucks.
Broadly,
though,
there's no
sign that the
unit's cash
needs will
meaningfully
come down. An
Uber
spokeswoman
did not have a
comment....
The argument
against
selling the
autonomous
unit would be
that Uber
needs to have
a way to
develop
self-driving
cars if other
companies
won't partner
with it. Long
term,
self-driving
cars could
help Uber's
ride-hailing
network reduce
costs from not
having to
employ
drivers. If
Uber doesn't
develop the
cars itself,
it will need
to figure out
how to get
other car
developers to
agree to use
their vehicles
to pick up
Uber's
passengers...."
[Read more](https://www.theinformation.com/articles/ubers-losses-mount-at-self-driving-car-unit?jwt=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJhbGFpbmtAcHJpbmNldG9uLmVkdSIsImV4cCI6MTU2NjA4NzU3MiwibiI6IkFsYWluIEtvcm5oYXVzZXIiLCJzY29wZSI6WyJzaGFyZSJdfQ.NGVWMEG_dL6ZBSWjvi378q9kH295P-j2xXbxGhdZWq0&unlock=b752f66dae5c2414)Hmmmm....
They are
really between
a rock and a
hard place.
They can't
really grow
without. If
someone else
is successful
at making it
work, they'll
operate it
themselves
rather than
license it
(Netflix
didn't license
its service to
Blockbuster).
With that
competition,
Uber's
valuation goes
to 10x
earnings which
is an ugly IPO
. The only
upside rests
in Driverless,
so they can't
get out.
Alain
August 10,
2018
Why Waymo Is Worth A Staggering $175 Billion Even Before Launching Its Self-Driving Cars
A. Ohnsman, Aug 7, “Waymo, Alphabet Inc.’s multibillion-dollar self-driving vehicle bet hasn’t yet launched commercial operations but that’s not stopping Morgan Stanley from predicting massive potential for the company that’s emerged as the leader in the autonomous tech race.
A year after
his initial
estimate that
Waymo was
likely a $75
billion
startup,
Morgan Stanley
analyst Adam
Jonas raised
it to a
staggering
$175 billion,
citing greater
revenue
potential from
passenger ride
services and
licensing of
its tech. The
biggest source
of future
revenue,
however, is
likely to come
from
autonomous
trucking and
delivery
services,
which Jonas
thinks could
generate as
much as $90
billion....."
[Read more](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2018/08/07/why-waymo-is-worth-a-staggering-175-billion-even-before-launching-its-self-driving-cars/#a07c18bdd3a9)Hmmmm....
Wow, a year
ago some
thought Waymo
and Uber were
neck2neck in
the Driverless
horse race.
Waymo executed
its business
plan, had no
crashes and
went from $75B
to $175B.
Uber executed
its business
plan, had one
crash and went
from $73B to
? (<$50B)
. Just in
case you
thought safety
wasn't
important.
Just think, if
Waymo
continues on
its business
plan without
causing a
crash, it
means that
their
"driverless
suite" really
does work in
its expanding
geo-fenced
areas. That
dynamic
evolution
suggests that
in September,
2020, there
will be
~100,000 Waymo
aTaxis serving
~5M trips a
day throughout
many medium
density areas
across a
substantial
part of the
USA. And in
September 2022
there will
be... (you
can do the
math...
Kornhauser's
Waymo Law..
10x every 2
years).
There is a
very big
"IF... &
WITHOUT", but
when the
"driverless
suite" works
(and it may
well be
working now,
since it
hasn't caused
a crash, but
Waymo hasn't
divulged "near
misses"..),
then the
probability
that the
"driverless
suite" causes
a crash is
really small
and there is
essentially
zero pushback
to delivering
what is an
almost
insatiable
demand for the
affordable
mobility
services
afforded by
the"driverless
suite".
That's why it
is worth $175B
today ....
and
potentially
$500B in 2020.
(Boy this is
fun!!). Alain
August 3, 2018
On the eve of a 6-month pilot, Drive.ai details its self-driving car plans
Friday, July 27, 2018
Ford is taking on Waymo and GM’s Cruise by creating its own standalone self-driving division
15, 2018
Waymo’s early rider program, one year in 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](https://medium.com/waymo/waymos-early-rider-program-one-year-in-3a788f995a9c) 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](https://youtu.be/3HrN12WG-2Q) Just
like watching
[Oszzie & Harriet](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OulA-4zii8)
or [Leave it to Beaver](https://archive.org/details/leave.it.to.beaver.complete.series).
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
June 12, 2018
Press Release,
May 31,
"...Today's
decision also
allows TCP
permit-holders
that hold a
"DMV
Manufacturer's
Testing Permit
– Driverless
Vehicles" to
operate
autonomous
vehicles
without a
driver in the
vehicle,
subject to
certain
restrictions.
Authorization
to provide
this service
is available
only to TCP
permit-holders
with
driverless
autonomous
vehicles that
have been in
DMV-permitted
driverless
operation on
California
roads for a
minimum of 30
days. Entities
seeking to
participate in
the pilot
program are
not allowed to
operate from
or within
airports; must
limit the use
of the vehicle
to one
chartering
party at any
given time
(i.e.,
fare-splitting
is not
permitted);
must ensure
that the
service can
only be
chartered by
adults 18
years and
older; and may
not accept
monetary
compensation
for the ride.
Participants
are also
required to
continuously
comply with
all DMV
regulations,
and to report
certain data
to the CPUC on
a quarterly
basis that
will be
publicly
available...."
[Read more](http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M215/K467/215467801.PDF) Hmmmm.....Good News: Able to serve customers
with autonomousTaxis. Bad news: Not able to Share Rides. (This is really
bad news
because having
the public
oversight body
focus
Driverless
serving single
occupants
thereby making
even worse the
fundamental
problem of the
personal auto
is simply
REALLY BAD!.
Their
opportunity is
to encourage
ride-sharing
whenever
possible so as
to alleviate
congestion and
reduce energy
and
pollution.
C'mon CPUC!!
The fact that
the rides are
free is
largely
irrelevant at
this time,
except as,
once again, a
subsidy to the
1%ers who are
a
disproportionate
element of the
early adopters
that are
likely to hail
this service.
Alain
3, 2018
SOFTBANK FLIPS THE VENTURE-CAPITAL SCRIPT AGAIN WITH GM DEA
[Waymo's fleet of self-driving minivans is about to get 100 times bigger](https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17412908/waymo-chrysler-pacifica-minvan-self-driving-fleet)
A. Hawkins,
May 31, "The
size of
Waymo's fleet
of
self-driving
Chrysler
Pacifica
minivans just
got radically
bigger. The
Alphabet unit
announced
today that it
struck a deal
with Fiat
Chrysler
Automobiles
(FCA), one of
Detroit's Big
Three
automakers,
for an
additional
62,000
minivans to be
deployed as
robot taxis."
Hmmmm.... Wow!! What is Waymo going to do
with 60,000
more aTaxis on
top of the
20,000 Jaguars
they ordered a
few months
back??? I
guess that
they will send
a couple
thousand to
NJ. .
Those 80,000
aTaxis will
serve about 4
million person
trips/day (~50 personTrips/aTaxi-day). That's about 0.5% of all personTrips greater
than 0.5 miles
in the USA on
a typical day,
roughly equal
to the number
of personTrips
that Uber
serves today
in the US on a
typical day
today in the
USA and is
~10% of the
personTrips
riding today's
conventional
transit
systems.
Wow!!!
Moreover, the
two companies
have also
begun
discussions
about how to
eventually
sell
self-driving
cars to
customers as
personally
owned
vehicles..." R[ead more](https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/31/17412908/waymo-chrysler-pacifica-minvan-self-driving-fleet) Hmmmm.... What???? Waymo can't be serious.
No way Waymo
or anyone else
is going to
allow these
vehicles to be
in the hands
of consumers.
The
professional
maintenance
and adult
supervision
required by
these vehicles
today makes
such a
suggestion
preposterous.
Moreover, this
would be
Uber's biggest
windfall, to
be able to buy
the best
driverless car
rather than
having to make
it
themselves.
No way Waymo
allows Uber
this
windfall. The
floor price
for a goose
that lays
golden eggs is
the investment
required to
purchase an
annuity of
golden eggs.
Not only is
that a big
number, Uber
doesn't have
any secret
sauce that can
extract more
value out of
those eggs
than Waymo
can. So, if
Uber bids high
enough to buy
them, they'll
lose money.
This "rumor"
deserves a
super [C'mon Man](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoXv6JHI0OE)!!!
Alain
May 25, 2018
PRELIMINARY REPORT: HIGHWAY: HWY18MH010 (Uber/Herzberg Crash)
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](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/NTSBuberPreliminaryMay2018.pdf)
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”.
“…The system is not designed to alert the operator. “ That may be the only good part of Uber’s design. In a Driverless vehicle, there is no one to warn, so don’t waste your time. If it is important enough to warn, then it is important enough for the automated system to start initiating things to do something about it. Plus, the Driver may not know what to do anyway. This is pretty much as I stated in PodCast 30 and the 24 edition of SmartDrivingCar, See below.
May 18, 2018 [The Open Source Solution to Autonomous Safety #smartdrivingcar](http://viodi.com/2018/05/09/the-open-source-solution-to-autonomous-safety-smartdrivingcar/) 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](http://viodi.com/2018/05/09/the-open-source-solution-to-autonomous-safety-smartdrivingcar/), Hmmmm....
[See the video](https://youtu.be/wVu43D6PfiA)
that was
played at the
Princeton SDC
Summit which
generated
substantial
positive
discussion at
the Summit. [See also full length video.](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/SDC_Summit_2018/180507-Voyage-Roughcut-1.mp4) Alain
May 10, 2018 [Uber Finds Deadly Accident Likely Caused By Software Set to Ignore Objects On Road](https://www.theinformation.com/articles/uber-finds-deadly-accident-likely-caused-by-software-set-to-ignore-objects-on-road?jwt=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJhbGFpbmtAcHJuY2V0b24uZWR1IiwiZXhwIjoxNTU3Mzg3NDI4LCJuIjoiR3Vlc3QiLCJzY29wZSI6WyJzaGFyZSJdfQ.o4p6EB44dU2-ZNq6Gm4FjXGvf8yQ7_VWE4_s6bIs9dU&unlock=ba34e04e870be38a)
As the Number of Driverless Cars Increase, So Does the Need for Car Maker Transparency R. Mitchell, Apr 30, “…A schism is developing in the driverless-car world — but not between fans and foes of robot cars.
Instead, on
one side are
driverless-car
advocates who
believe data
transparency
will lead to
safer
deployment of
driverless
vehicles and
help alleviate
public fears
about the
strange and
disruptive new
technology. On
the other are
some
automobile and
technology
companies
that, for good
commercial
reasons
perhaps,
prefer to keep
their workings
cloaked in
mystery.
The lack of
transparency
about the
workings of
sensors, logic
processors,
mapping
systems and
other
driverless
technology,
like the
debate over
robot-car
regulation,
could shape
public
perception of
the nascent
industry, said
Bryant Walker
Smith, a law
professor at
the University
of South
Carolina.
"Essentially,
[the public will be]
looking to see
whether these
companies are
trustworthy,"
he said...
In the Uber
death, a video
recorded by a
dashboard
camera —
turned over to
and released
by Tempe,
Ariz., police
— showed the
driverless-car
system failed
to brake for
the
pedestrian. It
left open the
question of
whether the
system sensors
might have
failed to
notice the
pedestrian at
all.
Uber's
reaction was
to apologize,
then dip into
some of its
$15 billion in
investment
capital to pay
the victim's
family in a
legal
settlement,
thus avoiding
a public
trial.
Uber declined
to make a
company
executive
available to
discuss data
and
transparency
on the record,
as did Waymo,
Tesla and
Lyft. Other
companies —
including
Zoox, Nutonomy
and General
Motors, parent
of Cruise
Automation —
agreed to
talk.
Even
driverless-car
advocates are
growing
concerned
about the
silence from
the industry's
major players.
Grayson
Brulte, a
well-known
consultant in
the driverless
industry,
worries that
recent polls
have
consistently
shown the
public is wary
about
driverless
technology,
while
companies
appear
reluctant to
engage with
the public.
"They're like
Rapunzel up in
the tower," he
said. "They
have to let
down their
hair and climb
down."
Alain
Kornhauser,
who heads the driverless-vehicle program at Princeton University, said he believes
that robot
cars will
improve
safety, reduce
driver stress,
add productive
time to the
day and offer
the elderly
and disabled
more
independence.
But the
technology is
far from
perfect, he
said, and some
robot-induced
deaths are
inevitable.
Rather than
wall off the
lessons
learned in
fatalities
such as the
recent Uber
and Tesla
incidents,
Kornhauser
said, the
companies
should be
sharing crash
data with one
another, with
outside
researchers
and with the
general
public. And
not just
black-box
data, but
driverless-system
data as well.
That would
make
driverless
cars safer and
faster, he
said.
"Uber should
not gain a
safety
advantage over
everyone else
because they
were involved
in this
crash,"
Kornhauser
said. "All of
the video,
radar, lidar
and logic
trails in the
seconds
leading up to
the crash
should be
released to
the public.
"If this
reveals some
of Uber's
intellectual
property, so
be it. If they
want to
protect their
intellectual
property, they
shouldn't
crash on
public roads."
..." [Read more](http://www.govtech.com/fs/automation/As-the-Number-of-Driverless-Cars-Increase-So-Does-the-Need-for-Car-Maker-Transparency.html)
Hmmmm...
Amen! This
article
addresses what
may well be
the most
important
issue facing
this
industry.
Crashes will
happen. The
industry has
been holding
its breath
knowing that
one, two,
three, ...
deaths are
coming.
Deaths are
associated
with every
substantial
technological
advance in
transportation.
Deaths
occurred with
cable cars,
with electric
traction, with
steam trains,
with
airplanes,
with
conventional
cars, with
elevators,
..., even with
airbags... why
do you have
yellow
stickers
affixed to the
passenger-side
sun visor of
your car.
That's
right...
airbags kill
children. No
one expected
that. But
when it was
"tripped
over", then
that event was
made
transparent to
everyone.
Similarly,
total
transparency
needs to be
created. Uber
needs to
release the
data that
shows that
their system
did, in fact
"see" Elaine
for four (4),
or however
many, seconds
before the
crash, but
didn't see her
reliably
enough to
convince
itself to
apply the
brakes. The
details of
that decision
logic and the uncertainty/stochastic characteristics of that decision process needs to
be divulged.
Why wasn't it
sure enough
that a
collision with
Elaine was
imminent for
it to apply
the brakes?
It is totally
disingenuous
for Uber to
claim that its
system never
saw Elaine
(Uber hasn't
said that.
They've said
nothing.
(They'd better
not even try
to say that.
Their system
is at least
pretty good.
it was
developed by
competent
individuals
from CMU and
other very
good places.
It saw Elaine,
it just didn't
see her well
enough or it
chose to
disregard what
it saw for
whatever
reason. The
nitty gritty
details of
those
uncertainties
MUST be
divulged in
all of their
minute, gory
and
transparent
details. Once
made then
everyone else
in the
industry can
look at their
comparable
processes/algorithms
and fix them
so that the
next time an
"Elaine" is
"seen" she
will not be
disregarded.
It is these
situations
that deserve
the most
serious
attention.
These are
infinitely
more important
and more
challenging
than the
"Trolley
(navel
contemplation)
Problem".
We will be
addressing,
with some of
the best
people in the
world, this
and other
fundamentally
important
issues at the
Annual
Princeton SmartDrivingCar
Summit May 16 & 17. Come join in and
contribute to
the
conversations
on these
issues. Russ
Mitchell will
be there.
Bryant
Walker-Smith
will be
there.
Grayson Brulte
will be there.
Raymond
Martinez (Head
of FMCSA) will
be there.
Bernard
Soriano (#2 @
CA DMV) will
be there. Nat
Beuse (#2 @
NHTSA) will be
there. Oliver
Cameron (CEO,
Voyage) will
weigh in,
Adam Jonas (#1
Auto Analyst,
Morgan
Stanley) will
be there.
Fengmin Gong
(Head, DiDi
Research) will
be there.
Justin Erlich
(Head AV
Policy, Uber)
will be
there, Sami
Naim,
(Manager,
Public Policy,
Lyft) will be
there, Mike
Jellen
(President,
Velodyne) will
be there, Paul
Brubaker (CEO
ATI21) will be
there, Matt
Moore (SVP,
Highway Loss
Data
Institute)
will be there,
Mike Scrudato
(#1 AV
Insurance guy,
SVP, Munich
Re) will be
there, Ro
Gupta (CEO
Carmera) will
be there.
Insurance/risk
assessment
related: Ann
Gergen (Exec.
Dir. AGRIP), Jerry Spears ( Montana Association of
Governments),
Laura
Kornhauser
(President,
Stratyfy),
David Harmer,
Head, Virginia
transit
Reliability
Pool) plus
many others
will be
there. From
the investment
community:
Sheldon,
Sandler (CEO,
Bel Air
Partners) will
be there. And
the list goes
on...
Please come
join in the
discourse. [Click to register.](https://www.regonline.com/registration/Checkin.aspx?EventID=2246346)
Alain Thursday,
April 26,
2018
###
###
###
###
###
###
This startup’s CEO wants to open-source self-driving car safety testing M. Harris, Apr 24, “… “I had to spend time after [the Uber crash] calming people down, telling folks at our deployments that it was an isolated incident,” says Voyage CEO Oliver Cameron in an exclusive interview with Ars Technica. “But the truth is that everyone in the industry is reinventing the technology and safety processes themselves, which is incredibly dangerous. Open source means more eyes, more diversity, and more feedback.”.
Starting
today, Voyage
will begin to
share safety
requirements,
test
scenarios,
metrics,
tools, and
code that it
has developed
for its own
Level 4
self-driving
taxis. Five
Voyage cars
are currently
deployed
carrying
passengers
within two
retirement
communities in
California and
Florida..." [Read more](https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/04/this-startups-ceo-wants-to-open-source-self-driving-car-safety-testing/?ref=streamer.ai) Hmmmm... This is a very positive
step taken by
Voyage's
Oliver Cameron
to address the
enormous
safety aspects
of this
technology.
It isn't
obvious how
everyone
involved in
this industry
needs to work
together to
assemble the
best "...safety requirements, test scenarios, metrics,
tools, and
code....".
There are
serious
concerns about
collusion and
protecting
fundamentally
valuable IP.
None the less,
what is
important is
that it is in
everyone's
best interest
to have
everyone be
safe. The
Uber crash
negatively
affected
everyone, even
Waymo.
Everyone would
be better off
today, had
Uber not
crashed. Similarly
with the Tesla
crashes. They've
also had a
negative
impact on
everyone.
This is a
market where
the faster the
better
products are
available in
the
marketplace,
the larger the
sum of
benefits to
society, and,
arguably, the
large the
accumulated
benefits to
each
individual
contributor/producer.
That argues
for everyone
working
together, aka
sharing: "...safety requirements, test scenarios, metrics,
tools, and
code....".
Whether "open-source"
his
the exact
right
mechanism for
"optimal
sharing" , or
it is
Standards
Committees, or
Regulations
(heaven
forbid), working
together
for Safety
rather
competing on
Safety is
absolutely
necessary in
this
r/evolution.
Kudos to
Oliver for
this
initiative.
Alain
April 12,
2018 [The way we regulate self-driving cars is broken—here's how to fix it](https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/04/the-way-we-regulate-self-driving-cars-is-broken-heres-how-to-fix-it/)
T. Lee, Apr
10,"...Federal
car safety
regulation has
traditionally
been based on
a thick book
of rules
called the
Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety
Standards
(FMVSS). These
regulations,
developed over
decades,
establish
detailed
performance
requirements
for every
safety-related
part of a car:
brakes, tires,
headlights,
mirrors,
airbags, and a
lot more....
Federal
regulations
don't say much
about how
companies
develop and
test cars
before
bringing them
to market. ...
But that
approach
doesn't work
for driverless
cars.
Companies can
do some
testing of
driverless
cars on a
closed course,
but it's
impossible to
reproduce a
full range of
real-world
situations in
a private
facility. So
at some point,
carmakers need
to put
self-driving
cars on public
roads for
testing
purposes—before
a manufacturer
is able to
clearly
demonstrate
that they're
safe. In
effect, this
makes the
public
involuntary
participants
in a dangerous
research
project.
But updating
the FMVSS is
neither
necessary nor
sufficient for
effective
regulation of
driverless
cars.... [Read more](https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/04/the-way-we-regulate-self-driving-cars-is-broken-heres-how-to-fix-it/) Hmmmm...What needs to be recognized is that
Driverless
cars (much
more so than
Safe- and
Self-driving
cars) are
really a
NEW MODE.
They are in
many ways
closer to an
elevator than a conventional car. Sure they run on
conventional
roads and not
vertical
shafts and
they can run
into each
other and have
to deal with
conventional
drivers and
"pedestrians".
but they will
not be owned
nor operated
by consumers,
but fleet operators
(think
buildings) .
They will
serve demand
upon request
to everyone
and anyone, be
shared when
appropriate
and convenient
and don't even
have a
driver's seat,
let alone the
controls of a
conventional
car.
Driverless
cars are
enormously
different than
conventional
cars.
Just as
railroads and
airplanes have
their own
safety
legislation
and regulatory
administration
tailored to
their needs,
so should
Driverless
cars. The
best way to
approach
regulation of
Driverless is
to start fresh
by declaring
them as a new
mode. Alain
April 5, 2018
Waymo Isn’t Going to Slow Down Now M. Bergen, “Apr 2, “ Waymo, the self-driving car company started by Google, did nothing after an autonomous vehicle run by Uber killed a pedestrian in Tempe, Arizona. It didn’t pull back on tests in the nearby suburb of Chandler, where passengers are already taking rides with no one behind the wheel. Its fleets elsewhere didn’t abandon public streets, a precautionary move made by Toyota. For Krafcik, the crash video validated the philosophy Waymo had been following long before he joined, back when it was still part of Google: Never trust humans in cars….
Some onlookers
question if Krafcik
will be around
to see Waymo's
alliances
through. "You
can't meet
John," said
Noble, the
consultant,
"and not think
he's someone
that would
have fun
running a
carmaker."
For now,
though, Krafcik
looks to be
having fun
running a
company that's
resolutely not
making cars.
On the
convention
floor in Las
Vegas, he
spotted a Ford
Transit Wagon.
It's a hulking
eight-seat
model he
worked on
years ago that
looks best
suited for
shuttling
around a troop
of Girl Scouts
or a military
platoon.
Krafcik leaped into the second row and turned to the nearest Ford employee: “Do you have a self-driving version?” The answer was no. “Coming soon,” Krafcik said with a laugh.” Read more Hmmmm… Wow, this is more info than has been put out by Google/Waymo in the previous 9 years combined. Looks like Waymo has entered the market/sales phase of its metamorphosis. By the way, who gets to benefit from the deployment of the 1st 20k of the Jaguars. Phoenix and Mountain View don’t have enough demand. Is there going to be a competition a la the frenzy created by the “who wants the 2nd Amazon HQ”? Alain
March 31,
2018
The Most Important Self-Driving Car Announcement Yet
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
March 24,
2018
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](http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-uber-death-video-20180321-story.html) 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&qu ot; 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
March 13,
2018
Waymo shows off what it is like to ride in a truly driverless self-driving car
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
California to allow testing of self-driving cars without a driver present
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
Billionaire Bets On a World Without Car Crashes
Waymo strikes a deal to buy ‘thousands’ more self-driving minivans from Fiat Chrysler
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
Didi Chuxing looks beyond ride-hailing to help Chinese cities tackle transport challenge
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
December 2,
2017
November 26,
2017
Volvo to supply Uber with up to 24,000 self-driving SUVs for taxi fleet
November 17,
2017
THE TECH & DESIGN ISSUE: LIFE AFTER DRIVING
November 10,
2017
Waymo will now put self-driving vans on public roads with nobody at the wheel
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](http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-waymo-self-driving-20171107-story.html) 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
November 4,
2017
APNewsBreak: Gov’t won’t pursue talking car mandate
October 27 ,
2017
Strategic Plan for FY 2018 -2022
October 6 ,
2017
FHWA Awards $4 Million Grant to South Carolina’s Greenville County for Automated Taxi Shuttles
September 1,
2017
Automated Vehicles: Are We Moving Too Fast or Too Slow?
August 25,
2017
Inside Waymo’s Secret World for Training Self-Driving Cars
August 21,
2017
Driverless-Car Outlook Shifts as Intel Takes Over Mobileye
August 7, 2017
Cadillac’s Super Cruise ‘autopilot’ is ready for the expressway
June 25, 2017
NTSB Opens Docket on Tesla Crash
June 19, 2017
Amazon Deal for Whole Foods Starts a Supermarket War
May 28, 2017
[Rethinking Mobility: The
‘pay-as-you-go’ ca: Ride hailing, just the start](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/Rethinking%20Mobility_GoldmanSachsMay2017.pdf)
May 23, 2017
[Princeton
SmartDrivingCar Summit](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/SDC_Summit_2017/CommercializationSummit2017_WithLink_052117.pdf)
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 engagementamong 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](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/SDC_Summit_2017/CommercializationSummit2017_WithLink_052117.pdf). [Fishkin Interview of Summit Summary](https://youtu.be/KvLsgRyLyZw)
and [Interview of Yann LeCun](http://www.techstination.com/interview.jsp?interviewId=3001).
[Read Inaugural Program with links to Slides](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/SDC_Summit_2017/CommercializationSummit2017_WithLink_052117.pdf). Hmmmm... Enormous thank you to all who
participated.
Well done!
Alain
April 17, 2017
Don’t Worry, Driverless Cars Are Learning From Grand Theft Auto
Extracting Cognition out of Images for the Purpose of Autonomous Driving
Adam Jonas’ View on Autonomous Cars
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](mailto:alaink@princeton.edu)
and hosted by
the [Princeton University](http://lists.princeton.edu)
This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.