M. Sena, November 2019, "... So, why are we now talking about the end of the motor show? I suppose it is in line with discussing the end of car ownership, the end of driving and the beginning of being chauffeured anywhere and at any time you want or need to move. It is sooo 1950s to be interested in cars. Attendance at the motor shows has been falling in recent years, as has the level of participation by the car companies.2 At the 2017 Frankfurt show, cars filled seven of the eleven halls. At this year’s show, they filled only four. OEMs that were no-shows included Toyota, Suzuki, Nissan, Renault, Mitsubishi, PSA, Kia, GM, FCA, Bentley, Rolls-Royce, Ferrari, As-ton Martin, Tesla and Volvo (although Polestar was there). Mercedes-Benz/AMG/Smart had down-sized and BMW occupied only a quarter of the space it had in 2017. Something is obviously happening....
Maybe
the medium is
delivering the
wrong
message.
Marshall
McLuhan coined
the phrase,
“The medium is
the mes-sage”
in his 1964
book,
Understanding
Media: The
Extensions of
Man. The
‘medium’ is
the channel
through which
the ‘message’
is
transmitted.
McLuhan argued
that the
medium is more
important than
the meaning or
content of the
message. He
said that the
“medium
itself, not
the content it
carries,
should be the
focus of study
since it
affects the
society in
which it plays
a role not
only by the
content it
delivers over
the medium,
but also by
the
characteristic
of the medium
itself.” He
said that the
medium itself
“shaped and
controlled the
scale and form
of human
association
and
action.”...
... CES may
well be a
better medium
for the
emerging
Mobility
Industry ...
plus many good
insights in
...
The Hotel
California
Parking Lot
.....................................
12 ...Ouch! Details matter...
Who Was
Richard
Trevithick?
.........................................
13 ...What we can all appreciate about the challenges
of being on
the
leading/bleeding
edge...
What WEWORK
Has to do With
Driverless
Cars
..............
13 ...Reset for SoftBank...
Why Musk Must
Push (Not So)
Smart Summon
.............
15 ...What I prefer to call StupidSummon...
A Dispatcher’s
Musings: The
Will to Charge
................... 16 ...Very insightful... "...Approximately
98% of people
who buy new
cars are not
rushing to
purchase BEVs
because they
are a pain in
the neck, and
that pain
comes from
having to plug
them in
everywhere you
go..."
Read more Hmmmm...
Enjoy!
Alain
B.
Templeton, Oct
30, "An Elon
Musk Tweet on
Tuesday
confirms past
predictions
that Tesla
will raise the
price of the
“Full Self
Driving”
add-on on Nov
1. This means
the price to
add it to your
car will jump
from $6,000 to
$7,000. The
price of this
function has
ranged from
$2,000 (a
short-lived
offer to those
who paid for
the earlier
“enhanced
autopilot”) to
this new
price. For a
long time, the
typical price
was around
$5,000.
You get very
little today
if you order
this product.
It is mostly
the promise of
future
software
updates, yet
to be released
or even yet to
be written,
that provide
more
autopilot, and
eventually
self-driving
functionality
to the car.
Earlier I
wrote a guide
to deciding if
you should buy
this add on.
What was
written still
stands, but
the price
increase
warrants an
update and
some new
numbers....
The full $7,000 or more price includes a hoped-for future value of a car that can do “real, true, actual full self-driving,” which is to say it can operate with no driver at all, and even join the Robotaxi fleet Tesla has promised and make big dollars for the owner. My recommendation, however, is that if that is going to happen, you take your $7,000 and buy Tesla shares or options. I suspect that if Tesla actually delivers on that well before anybody else, you will make more than enough on those shares to pay for any price increase. Of course, if they don’t deliver, you might not do so well with the investment." Read more Hmmmm... I agree. In fact, the chances that they'll deliver is not so great. Not because they can't deliver a software/sensor/actuator package that can drive safely without a driver in an Operational Design Domain that encompasses trips that have a sufficiently robust customer demand that could sustain an autonomousTaxi (aTaxi) service. Tesla may well can. Unfortunately what Tesla has yet to start even talking about doing to create a successful aTaxi service is to create the fundamental support infrastructure that an aTaxi service will require beyond just a driverless car that doesn't crash. As Michael Sena pointed out in his latest Dispatcher, what has set Tesla apart from other OEMs doing EVs is their investment in addressing EV's Achilles' heel... range anxiety... by investing in a supercharging network among other things. In order to scale, aTaxis are going to need substantial support services (maintenance facilities, customer service kiosks, community relations, ..) that can't be effectively provided by an over-the-air-gig service. Alain
B. Noble, Oct 28, "John Krafcik, CEO of Google self-driving affiliate Waymo LLC, said Monday that its Detroit plant is operating and outfitting fleets of vehicles with its autonomous driving hardware and software. The milestone allows the Alphabet Inc. subsidiary to put its automated "driver" into vehicles at mass scale. Doing so will help Waymo, an acknowledged leader in the self-driving space, to test its technology and expand its robotaxi service....
Waymo
has contracts
to buy up to
62,000
Pacifica
Hybrids from
Fiat Chrysler
and 20,000
vehicles from
Jaguar. The
Silicon Valley
company has
used Pacifica
Hybrid vans
the past three
years to test
its
self-driving
system.... "
Read
more Hmmmm... They continue their
orderly
processes of
scaling their
technology.
Hopefully
they'll start
deploying 10,
then 100, then
1,000, then...
in Central
Jersey. We're
working on
creating a
"welcoming
environment"
for a few of
those 82,000
to improve our
quality-of-life. Alain
Senate Commerce Committee, Oct. 29, "The Boeing CEO and chief engineer as well as government officials testified about the safety of the 737 MAX airplane at a hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee.". Watch more Hmmmm... If anyone working on Driverless mobility is not totally committed to safety and the implications of "short-cuts" and too-early deployments should watch this hearing. Alain
C.
Hart, Oct 11,
"Overview.
The FAA's
aircraft
certification
process has
played a major
role in
producing
airliners with
an exemplary
safety record
consisting of
a five-year
worldwide
average of
only one fatal
airliner crash
for every 2 V2
to 3 million
flights, and a
U.S. record of
only one
airline
passenger
fatality in
more than 10
years.
Nonetheless,
as with any
system that is
designed and
operated by
humans, the
certification
process can
never be
perfect, and
the two tragic
crashes that
resulted in
the creation
of the JATR
reveal a
critical need
to review the
process to
determine
whether
improvement
and
modernization
are
warranted.
After
extensive
effort, the
JATR members
have made many
recommendations regarding modernization and improvement of the
certification
process. Some
of the
recommendations
are very broad
in their
application
and others are
more specific.
Broad
Recommendations. Some of the broader recommendations derive from the
increasing
complexity of
aircraft
systems,
particularly
automated
systems and
the
interaction
and the
interrelationship
between
systems. As
aircraft
systems become
more complex,
ensuring that
the
certification
process
adequately
addresses
potential
operational
and safety
ramifications
for the entire
aircraft that
may be caused
by the failure
or
inappropriate
operation of
any system on
the aircraft
becomes not
only far more
important, but
also far more
difficult."...
Read
more Hmmmm... A very detailed
investigation
of the
certification
process
leading to
detailed
recommendations.
Chris, thank
you for all of
the dedicated
hard work
summarized in
this important
report and
your testimony
on Oct. 30, above.
Alain
W.
Bellamy, Oct
14, "An
international
team of civil
aviation
regulatory
authorities
from 10
different
countries
submitted a
71-page technical
review of
the Boeing 737
MAX flight
control system
to FAA
Associate
Administrator
for Aviation
Safety Ali
Bahrami Friday
Oct. 11.
JATR's
submission
comes as the
global fleet
of in-service
MAX aircraft
remains after
two fatal
accidents
involving Lion
Air and
Ethiopian
Airlines
killed a
combined 346
passengers and
crew.
The review
includes an
in-depth
analysis of
the
certification
process,
considerations
for human
factors in
pilot response
to unexpected
scenarios and
a focus on the
aircraft
systems level
integration
and the design
and
performance of
the
Maneuvering
Characteristics
Augmentation
System
(MCAS). A
total of 12
different
recommendations
were submitted
that include
the
following:...."
Read
more Hmmmm... A good summary of the above.
Alain
D.
Furness, Oct
29, "In August
2012, just
days before
Floridians
were set to
vote in the
primaries,
Republican
state house
representative
Jeff Brandes
became the
target of a
peculiar
attack ad.
“Technology is
great, but
driverless
cars? Is this
really a
priority for
our state?” an
incredulous
narrator asks
in the
30-second ad.
...
Press release, Oct 27, "U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao today announced nearly $50 million in new initiatives to expand access to transportation for people with disabilities, older adults, and individuals of low income. At the Access and Mobility for All Summit, Secretary Chao announced her intent to fund new programs to develop and deploy innovations in technology and further interagency partnerships to improve mobility....
“The purpose of this $50 million new initiative is to identify ways to provide more efficient, affordable, and accessible transportation services for people with disabilities, older adults and other underserved communities that often face greater challenges in accessing essential services,” said Secretary Chao. ...
As
part of her
keynote
address,
Secretary Chao
announced:
Read more Hmmmm... Sounds exactly like the focus on our 3rd Princeton SmartDrivingCar Summit last May and our Princeton Future Community Mobility for All Workshop, and Trenton Mobility for All Initiative (Slides, Kiosk Concepts). Alain
J. Lutin, Oct 28, "..." Read more Hmmmm...Excellent slide presentation describing the effort to demonstrate an Automated Emergency Braking adaptation on Transit Buses. Alain
A.
Grossman, Nov.
7. Following
six years of
consecutive
decline, bus
ridership in
the United
States
attained its
lowest level
ever recorded
in history
last year. In
this webinar,
Dr. Berrebi
will explain
reasons and
potential
solutions to
this decline
through
analysis of
passenger
count data
between 2012
and 2018 at
50,000 bus
stops in four
cities:
Portland,
Miami,
Minneapolis/St.
Paul, and
Atlanta. Data
show that in
all four
cities,
neighborhoods
with high
proportions of
white
residents lost
ridership at
the fastest
rate. In Miami
and Atlanta,
places with
high
concentrations
of
college-graduates
also correlate
with ridership
decline. These
results
suggest that
changes in the
travel
behavior of
choice riders
may explain
the bulk of
the decline.
Following six
years of
consecutive
decline, bus
ridership in
the United
States
attained its
lowest level
ever recorded
in history
last year. In
this webinar,
Dr. Berrebi
will explain
reasons and
potential
solutions to
this decline
through
analysis of
passenger
count data
between 2012
and 2018 at
50,000 bus
stops in four
cities:
Portland,
Miami,
Minneapolis/St.
Paul, and
Atlanta. Data
show that in
all four
cities, neighborhoods
with high
proportions of
white
residents lost
ridership
at the fastest
rate. In Miami
and Atlanta, places
with high
concentrations
of
college-graduates
also correlate
with ridership
decline.
These results
suggest that
changes in the
travel
behavior of
choice riders
may explain
the bulk of
the decline.
Dr. Berrebi
will discuss
the
inelasticity
between
frequency and
ridership and
recommend
service,
policy, and
infrastructure
solutions for
transit
agencies." Register
Hmmmm... What??? ... less white and less educated
people are the
suggestions to
improve bus
ridership??
Why not make
bus service
more
attractive..
on-demand (or
at the times
when people
want to go)
between places
that people
want to come
from and go
to. That
means
forgetting
about fixed
schedules and
fixed routes
and, except
between very
few places at
very few
times, forget
about the
current sized
buses. They
are rarely
full, usually
almost empty,
extremely
inefficient
and
environmentally
bad. You
should realize
that your only
hope is for
driverless
operation.
(Skyscrapers
of DumbCities
won't save the
industry since
those folks
will just ride
elevators
up&down in
their
multi-purpose
glass
dungeons.)
Amazing that
the transit
industry isn't
"all-in" for
driverless
technology
since it is
the only hope
it has to
offer
affordable
mobility that
can begin to
competitively
serve the
broad array of
freely chosen
lifestyles in
North America
(and many
other places
around the
world.).
Alain
E Simoudis, Sept 19, "hen taxis began to appear on New York streets in 1897, car ownership was rare. A century later, a resurgence of technology-enabled ride-hailing, ridesharing, micromobility and carsharing businesses are disrupting more traditional transportation. The popularity of on-demand mobility suggests a bright future for the industry, but few of these businesses are reliably profitable today. Working feverishly in search of profit and customer retention, and fighting against evolving competitors and regulations, these companies are quickly iterating their business models. Long-term success is far from guaranteed, but many of the ingredients (phone-hailing, cashless transactions, mapping, vehicle tracking, time/cost prediction) are identifiable as necessary components in today’s primordial soup of on-demand mobility....
In
order to
create
on-demand
mobility
services
businesses
with long-term
profitability,
companies must
increase what
customers are
willing to pay
for each
service and
each
customer’s
“share of
wallet,”
and/or reduce
the cost of
providing each
service. There
are at least
two ways to
increase
revenue and
four ways to
reduce costs.
In particular,
revenues can
be increased
by
providing:..
September,
2019, "This
document
provides a
vision of the
future of
mobility. It
captures the
diverse views
of the
European
automotive
supplier
community as
the industry
undergoes one
of the biggest
transformations in its 125 year history.
Our vision outlines how European suppliers, in close cooperation with car and truck manufacturers, high-tech companies, regulators and other stakeholders, expect to shape tomorrow’s mobility landscape...." Read more Hmmmm... View from the European Association of Automotive Suppliers. Thank you Jacques. Alain
K.
Wiggers, Oct
29, "In the
aftermath of a
March 2018
accident
involving an
autonomous
Uber vehicle
that killed a
pedestrian in
Tempe,
Arizona, Uber
retained law
firm
LeClairRyan to
compile a
report
focusing on
the safety
culture and
safety
practices of
the Advanced
Technologies
Group, or ATG.
(That’s the
division
responsible
for Uber’s
autonomous
vehicle
development.)
One of the
recommendations
it gave was
the creation
of an
independent
external
review board
that would
examine Uber’s
policies,
processes, and
procedures.
And today,
roughly a year
after the
report’s
publication,
Uber says it’s
established
such a board.
Uber’s new
self-driving
safety and
responsibility
advisory
(SARA) board
is charged
with
reviewing,
advising, and
suggesting
changes to
ATG’s
policies. It’s
made up of six
members who
will provide
input on
organization-wide
goals and
priorities,
and suggest
improvements
to the way
Uber ATG
develops
driverless
technology and
brings it to
market..." Read
more Hmmmm... A fine way for Uber to
obtain
independent
advice;
however, this
board in no
way helps
"certify" that
Uber's
autonomous
vehicles are
safe or
improves the
public's image
of Uber's
technology.
In order to
begin to
achieve public
trust in its
technology,
Uber will need
to become much
more
transparent.
They will need
to release
unaltered
performance data
to
the public and
hope that the
academic
research
community
takes the time
and effort to
independently
assess Uber's
worthiness.
Alain
L.
Beachum, Oct
24,
"Scientists
say they
successfully
taught rats to
drive tiny
cars, which
has more
potential for
human research
than you might
think.
Researchers at
the University
of Richmond in
Virginia
trained lab
rats to drive
the makeshift
cars, which
they say
proves the
little rat
brains are
much more
capable of
performing
complicated
tasks than
previously
realized. And,
surprisingly,
learning to
drive appeared
to reduce the
rats’ stress.
The results of
this research
could help
scientists
understand
anxiety and
depression in
humans...." Read
more Hmmmm... We all get to have fun
with our
research!
Alain
Martorell, Oct 10, "...drones and IoT technology. SEAT, Telefónica, DGT, Ficosa and Aeorum have rolled out a pilot project featuring a drone and a connected car that can detect cyclists and obstacles on the road. The feature needed to carry out this project included cellular mobile connectivity with the primary characteristics of the future 5G network, and the aim is to provide drivers with a "sixth sense" so they can prevent accidents..." Read more Hmmmm.. How about ... just drive slowly. Please stop trying to sell technology that, at best will end up in a drawer. See another video for the unworthy entitled. You can't make up this stuff. C'mon Man! Alain
A. Marshall, Oct. 20, "...In fact, parking lots are one of the most human places you could put a car that doesn’t need a human to drive. ... What??? does!!!... Their rules are not always consistent, and drivers, moreover, don’t always follow them. They’re full of little people-to-people interactions: a wave to let the dad behind the stroller that that you’re going to stop and let him cross; a nod to tell the other driver to inform him that you’re waiting for this woman fiddling with her keys to finally pull out of her spot. These are very complicated things for computer systems to learn, even if they’re trained on tons and tons of real-life parking lot data...
One thing would make self-driving in parking lots much easier, experts say: vehicle-to-vehicle communication. ... What??? Do we now need even more gizmos to do something that we should be doing?? This is so bad!!... " Read more Hmmmm... These are reasons why it is probably the last place you want to release this feature. Elon, Please recall it!!! All this risk for essentially zero benefit. Alain
November
20th-22nd,
2019
HILTON MIAMI
DOWNTOWN
1601 BISCAYNE
BLVD
MIAMI, FL
33132
F. Fishkin, May 18,, "From the 3rd Annual Princeton Smart Driving Car Summit, join Professor Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin. In this special edition, the summit's focus on mobility for all with guests Anil Lewis, Executive Director of Blindness Initiatives at the National Federation of the Blind and ITN America Founder Katherine Freund."
April 5, F. Fishkin, "The success of on demand transit company Via is proving that ride sharing systems can work. Public Policy head Andrei Greenawalt joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for a wide ranging discussion. Also: Uber, Tesla, Audi, Apple and Nuro are making headlines"
April 5, F. Fishkin, "Here comes congestion pricing in New York City...but what will it mean? Former city Taxi and Limousine Commission head and transportation expert Matthew Daus joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin. Also...Tesla, VW and even Brexit! All on Episode 98 of Smart Driving Cars."
March 28, F. Fishkin, "The Future Networked Car? From Sweden, The Dispatcher publisher, Michael Sena, joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for the latest edition of Smart Driving Cars. Plus ...the Boeing story has much to do with autonomous vehicles and more. Tune in and subscribe."
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"
Elon, you sell cars to individuals at which point you relinquish control and responsibility, and thankfully, liability, for that car. Please do everything that you can to be certain that your cars are used responsibly at all times and that those individuals are alert and in control at all times; else, you'll re-acquire the responsibility and the liability. The burden of liability is not good for any business. Liability without control is TrainWreck. The regulators won't save you. Alain
- If you get matched with a fully driverless car, you'll see a notification in your Waymo app that confirms the car won't have a trained driver up front....
- you can enjoy having the car all to yourself....
R.
Mitchell, Oct.
4, " Smart
Summon is for
parking lot
use. But
drivers have
other ideas.
Tesla unleashed the latest twist in driverless car technology last week, raising more questions about whether autonomous vehicles are outracing public officials and safety regulators.
...Using
a smartphone,
a person can
now command a
Tesla to turn
itself on,
back out of a
parking space
and drive to
the smartphone
holder's
location - say
at a curb in
front of a
Costco
store.." Read
more Hmmmm.... Russ, great article. A
must read!
Elon,
please stop.
StupidSummon
was a bad
Valley-entitled
idea before
you released
it. Now that
it is out
there it will
ruin all that
is good about
Tesla,
AutoPilot and
Driverless
cars. The
shorters are
going to have
a field day.
While
you are at it
also remove
all of the
DistractTainment
add ons or
limit their
use when
AutoPilot is
NOT on and
drivers are
engaged in
driving. Just
go back to
V09! Along
the way also
get the
Automated
Emergency
Braking (AEB)
system to work
properly (See
NTSB
below).
To do that,
maybe you
should take a
serious look
at Velodyne's
new
Tesla LiDAR.
It may be able
to tell you if
the stationary
object in the
lane ahead is
high enough
above the road
surface before
your AEB
system decides
to disregard
it. Then
Tesla's may
stop decapitating
drivers.
If you don't remove StupidSummon
then at least
be sure to
limit its use
to the Tesla
owner's own
private
property by
responsible
users. (You
know the GPS
coordinates of
where each
owner lives,
so you can
geofence it.
You also know
each
irresponsible
use (You get
the videos).
Irresponsible
use (use in
the violation
of the
conditions
spelled out in
the user's
manual) should
void its
future
availability
in that car
unless proper
amend are
made. If not,
then insurance
companies
should clearly
state that
insuring the
use of this
feature
requires a
substantial
additional
premium; else,
you're not
covered.
Courts should
view that use
of this
feature
implies
premeditated
harm and
demonstrates
an extreme
indifference
to human
life. Parking
Lot owners
should install
signs
forbidding the
use of this
feature on
their property
to protect
themselves
from being
dragged into
the claims
process.
K. Korosec,
Sept 16,
"Waymo
transported
6,299
passengers in
self-driving ...drivered,
not
driverless...Chrysler
Pacifica
minivans in
its first
month
participating
in a robotaxi
pilot program
in California,
according to a
quarterly
report the
company filed
with the
California
Public
Utilities
Commission.
In all, the
company
completed
4,678
passenger
trips in July
— plus another
12 trips for
educational
purposes. It’s
a noteworthy
figure for an
inaugural
effort that
pencils out to
an average of
156 trips
every day that
month. And it
demonstrates
that Waymo has
the resources,
staff and
vehicles to
operate a
self-driving
vehicle pilot
while
continuing to
test its
technology in
multiple
cities and
ramp up its
Waymo One
ride-hailing
service in
Arizona...
The CPUC
authorized in
May 2018 two
pilot programs
for
transporting
passengers in
autonomous
vehicles. The
first one,
called the Drivered
Autonomous
Vehicle
Passenger
Service Pilot
program,
allows
companies to
operate a
ride-hailing
service using
autonomous
vehicles as
long as they
follow
specific
rules.
Companies are
not allowed to
charge for
rides, a human
safety driver
must be behind
the wheel and
certain data
must be
reported
quarterly.
The second
CPUC pilot
would allow
driverless
passenger
service —
although no
company has
yet to obtain
that
permit...."Read
more Hmmmm.... Be sure to look at the Waymo
Quarterly
Report and
that of the
other 3
companies: Zoox,
AutoX
and Pony.ai.
Those 4
companies
reported
respectively [ 4,678; 103; 9; 0] vehicleTrips; [
6,299; 134;
13; 0]
personTrips;
[59,917; 352; ?; 0] vehicleMiles, and [
55; 10; 1; 0]
number
of unique
vehicles used
throughout the
quarter. Note
Waymo only
began
operating on
July 2, the
last month of
the quarter [May, June, July]. Note: the CPUC does not permit
casual
shared-ride
services
(serving
individuals or
groups of
individuals
who weren't
predisposed to
travel
together). Go
figure??? Alain
Also note: This is Drivered Service,
meaning there
is an
attendant/driver
inside each
vehicle for
each trip; so
this is
actually
conventional
ride-hailing,
a la Lyft/Uber
with fancy
schmancy
vehicles. The
CPUC did NOT
require
"disengagement
reporting" so
one has no
idea as to the
extent of
driver/attendant
involvement is
the provision
of the
Drivered
service. It
will be
interesting to
learn if Waymo
considers this
activity to be
part of its AV
testing
program and
includes the
disengagement
performance of
these vehicles
in its
disengagement
report to the
CA DMV at the
end of the
year. We'll be able to infer if that the
disengagement
performance is
exemplary when
Waymo decides
to begin Driverless
service
(w/o an
attendant, as
opposed to Drivered
service).
1. Figure 4, The speed of the Tesla in the last 221 seconds before the crash showing that the Tesla was traveling rather slowly in the 100 seconds before the crash (under 20 mph), but then accelerated (as discussed above) in the 3 seconds just prior to the crash, beginning as soon as the lead SUV changed lanes,
2. Figure 5, the distance between the Tesla and its lead vehicle, showing that the TACC worked really well until the lead vehicle "disappeared" (changed lanes), and"... Data show that at about 490 msec before the crash, the system detected a stationary object in path of the Tesla. At that time, the forward collision warning was activated; the system presented a visual and auditory warning. Data also shows that the AEB did not engage and that there was no driver-applied braking of steering prior to the crash. According to Tesla, the AEB was active at the time of the crash, and considering that the stopped fire truck was detected about half a second before impact, there likely was not sufficient time to activate the AEB." ...This implies that the AEB and its functioning in collaboration with the TACC needs to be substantially re-evaluated/re-designed. Alain
3. Figure 6 which clearly depicts the movement of the Tesla relative to the lead vehicle and the Firetruck in the 15 seconds before the crash. The Tesla's radar and front facing camera mush have "seen' the firetruck 4 seconds before the crash and every sensing loop (1/10th of a second) during the last 4 seconds yet...
M. Isaac,
Aug 27,
"Anthony
Levandowski
was once one
of Silicon
Valley’s most
sought after
technologists.
As a pioneer
of
self-driving
car
technology, he
became a
confidant of
Larry Page, a
co-founder of
Google, and
helped develop
the search
giant’s
autonomous
vehicles. Uber
wooed him to
gain an edge
in
self-driving
techniques.
Venture
capitalists
threw their
money at him.
But on
Tuesday, Mr.
Levandowski,
39, fell far
from that
favored
stature.
Federal
prosecutors
charged him
with 33 counts
of theft and
attempted
theft of trade
secrets from
Google. ...
The criminal
indictment
against Mr.
Levandowski
from the
United States
Attorney’s
Office for the
Northern
District of
California
opens a new
chapter in a
legal battle
that has
embroiled
Google, its
self-driving
car spinoff
Waymo and its
rival Uber in
the
high-stakes
contest over
autonomous
vehicles. The
case also
highlights
Silicon
Valley’s
no-holds-barred
culture, where
gaining an
edge in new
technologies
versus
competitors
can be
paramount....
According to the indictment, Mr. Levandowski downloaded more than 14,000 files containing critical information about Google’s autonomous-vehicle research before leaving the company in 2016. He then made an unauthorized transfer of the files to his personal laptop, the indictment said. Mr. Levandowski joined Uber later that year when the ride-hailing firm bought his new self-driving trucking start-up, which was called Otto....
“The Bay
Area has the
best and
brightest
engineers, and
they take big
risks,” John
Bennett, the
F.B.I. special
agent in
charge of the
San Francisco
Division, said
at a news
conference on
Tuesday. “But
Silicon Valley
is not the
Wild West. The
fast-paced and
competitive
environment
does not mean
federal laws
do not
apply.”Mr.
Levandowski’s
next court
date is Sept.
4. If he is
convicted, he
could face a
maximum of 10
years in
prison, a
$250,000 fine
for every
count and
additional
restitution.
“All of us are
free to move
from job to
job,” said
David L.
Anderson,
United States
attorney in
the Northern
District of
California.
“What we
cannot do is
stuff our
pockets on the
way out the
door.”..." Read
more Hmmm... Central to this
technology is
the perception
of
personal
safety and
trust. Lying,
cheating &
stealing can't
be part of
this industry,
else it will
never emerge
from the
venture
stage. If DeiselGate
and the Uber
crash weren't
enough, let
this be the
next wake-up
call to this
industry to
clean up its
ethical
behavior.
Hopefully the
FBI will also
aggressively
pursue all
cyber
attackers. It
isn't cute,
nor a virtual
reality game.
It is hard
serious work
and creativity
focused on
improving the
quality of
everyday life.
Alain
J.
Browne, Aug
16,
"Autonomous
vehicles are
the future.
Self-driving
cars could
change our
lives,
heralding an
era of greater
convenience,
improved
productivity
and safer
roads...." Read
more Hmmmm.... Actually much of this opening sentence
is a myth...
It doesn't
take
Self-driving
or Driverless
to have
automation
technology
yield safer
roads. It
takes
safe-driving
technology
that works,
like Automated
Emergency
Braking (front
and rear)...
And ... are we
really going
to do our
"manufacturing
or service job
" (increase
"productivity")
if we don't
have to do the
work of
driving
anymore??? Of
the few
"riding
shotgun to
work" what
percentage are
doing work
while riding
shotgun?
Certainly less
than 10%.
Less than 1%?
So much for
productivity
improvements
If we get to Driverless, then the myths aren't
myths. There
will be fewer
private cars,
downtown
congestion
will be
reduced, the
environment
will be saved,
the insurance
industry's
gross revenues
will go down substantially (but
their profits
will go up)
and AVs are
already safer
than humans
that text
and/or are
"under the
influence"
while
driving.
If we don't get to Driverless, then we'll remain with "Do-it-yourself private mobility" that will include Self-driving assistance. Armed with that form of personal mobility, then all the myths are myths: More private cars ... and the policy implications are clear. See: J. M. Greenwald, A. L. Kornhauser "It’s up to us: Policies to improve climate outcomes from automated vehicles". Also, to have a proper perspective of the role of transportation and car/"FordF150s" in greenhouse gas emissions see... M. Sivak, Aug 22, "Increased relative contribution of medium and heavy trucks to U.S. greenhouse gas emissions" Alain
K.
conger, Aug
7, "Uber set
two dubious
quarterly
records on
Thursday as it
reported its
results: its
largest-ever
loss,
exceeding $5
billion, and
its
slowest-ever
revenue
growth. The
double whammy
immediately
renewed
questions
about the
prospects for
the company,
the world’s
biggest
ride-hailing
business. Uber
has been
dogged by
concerns about
sluggish sales
and whether it
can make
money, worries
that were
compounded by
a
disappointing
initial public
offering in
May.
For the second
quarter, Uber
said it lost
$5.2 billion,
the largest
loss since it
began
disclosing
limited
financial data
in 2017. A
majority of
that — about
$3.9 billion —
was caused by
stock-based
compensation
that Uber paid
its employees
after its
I.P.O.
Excluding that
one-time
expense, Uber
lost $1.3
billion, or
nearly twice
the $878
million that
it lost a year
earlier. On
that sariesme
basis and
excluding
other costs,
the company
said it
expected to
lose $3
billion to
$3.2 billion
this
year...Lyft
has also
reported a
series of deep
losses. This
week, it said
it lost $644.2
million in the
second
quarter,
though it
added that it
expected that
amount to
abate. Several
months
earlier, Lyft
had also
posted a
particularly
steep loss
related to
stock-based
compensation
payouts to its
employees..."
Read
more Hmmmm.... No wonder Uber looked so good prior to
its IPO, it
hadn't "paid"
its
employees. So
is this really
a "one time"
expense??
Anyway,
Driverless is
their only
potential
savior as a
$40 stock.
They can't
afford to pay
their
employee,
their gig
workers can't
feed families,
new customers
can't afford
their prices
and food
delivery
generates only
chump change.
Uber
Stock price,
See also...Uber and Lyft keep losing money while driving up the
number of cars
on our
overcrowded
streets.
Alain
Tesla,
July 16, "At
Tesla, we
believe that
technology can
help improve
safety. That’s
why Tesla
vehicles are
engineered to
be the safest
cars in the
world. We
believe the
unique
combination of
passive
safety, active
safety, and
automated
driver
assistance is
crucial for
keeping not
just Tesla
drivers and
passengers
safe, but all
drivers on the
road. It’s
this notion
that grounds
every decision
we make – from
the design of
our cars, to
the software
we introduce,
to the
features we
offer every
Tesla owner.
Model S, X and
3 have
achieved the
lowest
probability of
injury of any
vehicle ever
tested by the
U.S.
government’s
New Car
Assessment
Program.
... In the 2nd quarter, we registered one accident for every 3.27 million miles driven in which drivers had Autopilot engaged. For those driving without Autopilot but with our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 2.19 million miles driven. For those driving without Autopilot and without our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 1.41 million miles driven. By comparison, NHTSA’s most recent data shows that in the United States there is an automobile crash every 498,000 miles.... " Read more Hmmmm.... This summary uses "accident" for Teslas and "crash" for NHTSA. This may suggest that the Tesla and NHTSA are not comp[arable... Tesla is reporting about apples and NHTSA is referring to "oranges". That notes; however, it does seem that for Teslas with and without AutoPilot and the other active safety features, there is consistency in the measure. A more detailed question arises about the equivalence of the driving domain for each category as well as who is at fault in each of these situations. Even in light of these issues and details, the large variation in the rates: 3.27 v 2.18 v 1.41 is very significant among Teslas. Seems as if AutoPilot and Tesla's other active collision avoidance safety features are improving safety of Teslas. The spread from the 0.5 value for NHTSA is really astonishing making Teslas much safer than the average of all other cars. Unfortunately these numbers only scratch the surface and beg for more details. In the past I have called for an independent evaluation of the Tesla crash statistics and I do that again there today. I'll offer to do it. Tesla should encourage someone to do it. As it stands today, not enough people believe or trust Tesla (see below) Tesla. That's unfortunate because improved safety is THE major objective of SmartDrivingCar technology. Alain
Oct 16, Establishes
fully
autonomous
vehicle pilot
program A4573
Sponsors:
Zwicker (D16);
Benson (D14)
Oct 16, Establishes New
Jersey
Advanced
Autonomous
Vehicle Task
Force AJR164
Sponsors:
Benson (D14);
Zwicker (D16);
Lampitt (D6)
May
24, "About
9:58 p.m., on
Sunday, March
18, 2018, an
Uber
Technologies,
Inc. test
vehicle, based
on a modified
2017 Volvo
XC90 and
operating with
a self-driving
system in
computer
control mode,
struck a
pedestrian on
northbound
Mill Avenue,
in Tempe,
Maricopa
County,
Arizona.
...The
vehicle was
factory
equipped with
several
advanced
driver
assistance
functions by
Volvo Cars,
the original
manufacturer.
The systems
included a
collision
avoidance
function with
automatic
emergency
braking, known
as City
Safety, as
well as
functions for
detecting
driver
alertness and
road sign
information.
All these
Volvo
functions are
disabled when
the test
vehicle is
operated in
computer
control..."
Read more
Hmmmm....
Uber must
believe that
its systems
are better at
avoiding
Collisions and
Automated
Emergency
Braking than
Volvo's.
At least this
gets Volvo
"off the
hook".
"...According to data obtained from the
self-driving
system, the
system first
registered
radar and
LIDAR
observations
of the
pedestrian
about 6
seconds before
impact, when
the vehicle
was traveling
at 43 mph..."
(=
63
feet/second)
So the system
started
"seeing an
obstacle when
it was 63 x 6
= 378 feet
away... more
than a
football
field,
including end
zones!
"...As
the vehicle
and pedestrian
paths
converged, the
self-driving
system
software
classified the
pedestrian as
an unknown
object, as a
vehicle, and
then as a
bicycle with
varying
expectations
of future
travel
path..." (NTSB:
Please tell us
precisely when
it classified
this "object'
as a vehicle
and be
explicit about
the expected "future
travel
paths." Forget the path, please just tell us the precise
velocity
vector that
Uber's system
attached to
the "object",
then the
"vehicle".
Why didn't the
the Uber
system
instruct the
Volvo to begin
to slow down
(or speed up)
to avoid a
collision? If
these paths
(or velocity
vectors) were
not accurate,
then why
weren't they
accurate? Why
was the object
classified as
a
"Vehicle" ?? When did it finally classify the object as a "bicycle"?
Why did it
change
classifications?
How often was
the
classification
of this object
done. Please
divulge the
time and the
outcome of
each
classification
of this
object. In the tests that
Uber has done,
how often has
the system
mis-classified
an object as a
"pedestrian"when the object was
actually an
overpass, or
an overhead
sign or
overhead
branches/leaves
that the car
could safely
pass under, or
was nothing at
all??
(Basically,
what are the
false alarm
characteristics
of Uber's
Self-driving
sensor/software
system as a
function of
vehicle speed
and
time-of-day?)
"...At 1.3 seconds before impact, (impact speed was 39mph = 57.2 ft/sec) the self-driving system determined that an emergency braking maneuver was needed to mitigate a collision" (1.3 x 57.2 = 74.4 ft. which is about equal to the braking distance. So it still could have stopped short.
"...According to Uber,
emergency
braking
maneuvers are
not enabled
while the
vehicle is
under computer
control, to
reduce (eradicate??) the potential
for erratic
vehicle
behavior.
..." NTSB: Please describe/define potential and erratic vehicle
behavior Also
please uncover
and divulge
the design
& decision
process that
Uber went
through to
decide that
this risk
(disabling the
AEB) was worth
the reward of
eradicating "
"erratic vehicle behavior". This
is
fundamentally
BAD design.
If the Uber
system's false
alarm rate is
so large that
the best way
to deal with
false alarms
is to turn off
the AEB, then
the system
should never
have been
permitted on
public
roadways.
"...The vehicle operator
is relied on
to intervene
and take
action. " Wow! If Uber's
system
fundamentally
relies on a
human to
intervene,
then Uber is
nowhere near
creating a
Driverless
vehicle.
Without its
own Driverless
vehicle Uber
is past "Peak
valuation".
Video similar to part of Adam's Luncheon talk @ 2015 Florida Automated Vehicle Symposium on Dec 1. Hmmm ... Watch Video especially at the 13:12 mark. Compelling; especially after the 60 Minutes segment above! Also see his TipRanks. Alain
This list is
maintained by
Alain
Kornhauser
and hosted by
the Princeton
University
Leave
|Re-enter
[log in to unmask]"
alt="imap:[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.39&filename=dhbhaandkmfbffia.png"
class=""
width="106"
height="88"
border="0"> [log in to unmask]"
alt="imap:[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.40&filename=lglcejopfgfnajaj.png"
class=""
width="238"
height="92"
border="0">[log in to unmask]">Mailto:[log in to unmask]