imap:<a href=[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.2&filename=hejedgabmgkdglfj.png" class="" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" width="156" height="92" border="0">

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">  Nikola Founder Trevor Milton Charged With Lying to Investors

C. . Ramey, July 29, "Trevor Milton, the founder of Nikola Corp. and onetime executive chairman of the electric-truck startup, was indicted Thursday on securities-fraud charges for what prosecutors said was a scheme to mislead investors about the company's product and technology development.

Mr. Milton faces two counts of securities fraud and one count of wire fraud, according to the indictment. The U.S. attorney's office in Manhattan, which brought the charges, is set to make an announcement about the indictment on Thursday morning.

A spokesman for Mr. Milton didn't immediately comment. Last year, Mr. Milton said on Twitter that he intended to defend himself against "false allegations".  He resigned from Nikola in September as concerns mounted about the startup darling that had attracted backing from some of the industry's biggest names.

Nikola wasn't charged. The company said that Mr. Milton hasn't been involved in the company's operations or communications since his resignation. "Nikola has cooperated with the government throughout the course of its inquiry," the company's statement said. "We remain committed to our previously announced milestones and timelines and are focused on delivering Nikola Tre battery-electric trucks later this year from the company's manufacturing facilities."..."  Read more  Hmmmm...  Speaks for itself. Alain


[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="41" height="42">  SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 226, Zoom-Cast Episode 226 w/Tim Higgins, author: POWER PLAY: Tesla, Elon Musk and the Bet of the Century

F. Fishkin, July 22, "The Wall Street Journal's Tim Higgins has a new book arriving August 3rd titled POWER PLAY: Tesla, Elon Musk and the Bet of the Century.   You can bet it's a lively discussion with Tim on the latest Smart Driving Cars with Princeton's Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin.    Or listen..  https://soundcloud.com/smartdrivingcar/smart-driving-cars-226-with-tim-higgins-author-of-power-play. " Alexa, play the Smart Driving Cars podcast!".  Ditto with Siri, and GooglePlay ...  Alain

[log in to unmask]" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" width="44" height="44" border="0">   The SmartDrivingCars eLetter, Pod-Casts, Zoom-Casts and Zoom-inars are made possible in part by support from the Smart Transportation and Technology ETF, symbol MOTO.   For more information: www.motoetf.com.  Most funding is supplied by Princeton University's Department of Operations Research & Financial Engineering and Princeton Autonomous Vehicle Engineering (PAVE) research laboratory as part of its research dissemination initiative


[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="50" height="39">   Why Tesla's 'Beta Testing' Puts the Public at Risk

G. Bensinge, July 30, " One of the greatest tricks technology companies ever played was convincing their human guinea pig users that they were a privileged group called beta testers.

From novel email software to alternative versions of Twitter to voice-enabled listening devices, such trials are cheap and easy to make available to thousands or millions of customers. It's a great way to see how a new version stacks up against the old.

Other than some annoying glitches or unfamiliar icons, software beta testing is generally innocuous. The stakes for most apps are far below life and death.

But there's nothing innocuous about the beta tests being run by Elon Musk, the billionaire C.E.O. of Tesla. He has turned American streets into a public laboratory for the company's supposed self-driving car technology.

Tesla says that its inaccurately named full self-driving and autopilot modes are meant to assist drivers and make Teslas safer, but autopilot has been at the center of a series of erratic driving incidents.

In public, Mr. Musk sometimes overhypes these technologies on social media and in other statements. Yet Tesla engineers have privately admitted to California regulators that they are not quite ready for prime time..

If Tesla wants to run beta tests with human guinea pigs, it should do so on a closed track ... Unfortunately, they've, presumably, done that and checked that box!  ......" Read more Hmmmm...  Beta testing using a responsible privileged group is actually very good; however, the Beta Testers  must be responsible and not "loose canons". 

The objective of Beta testing is to uncover problems.  Challenges are to be expected.  Beta testers must be instructed/messaged carefully by all in the organization.  The false aura that Elon creates/ed to sell his product is completely counter productive to beta testing the product to uncover its weaknesses.  Consequently ALL problems and shortcomings with AutoPilot/FSD come from the head.  Elon needs to be held accountable.  Nikola's ex-chairman is being charged with lying to investigators; Elon may need to be charged with lying to his customers and Beta testers.  He is really good and really creative, but he needs a little humility.  He needs to step forward and accept responsibility here; else, he needs to be indicted for lying to his customers. 

Poor Nikola Tesla...The two guys that leveraged his good name have been taking liberties that he can't be thrilled about. Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">  Was the Backup Driver in an Uber Autonomous Car Crash Wrongfully Charged?

   R. Stern, July 9, "No doubt, Rafaela Vasquez should have seen pedestrian Elaine Herzberg sooner on March 18, 2018, and taken action before the autonomous Uber vehicle she was riding in hit and killed her.

Widely seen interior video from a camera inside the Volvo SUV shows that Vasquez was not looking at the road in the seconds before the impact.

But there's far more to the story than that, and Vasquez's defense team says the grand jury didn't get to hear information critical to the case before deciding to indict her last September on a charge of negligent homicide. Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk decided that Uber was not criminally liable in the crash in March 2019.

Her private lawyers, Albert Morrison and Marci Kratter, filed an extensive motion in Maricopa County Superior Court on Tuesday demanding that the case be remanded back to the grand jury for a new determination of probable cause...." Read more Hmmmm...In short my ethics say... Yes!  See also Vasquez Remand Motion, July 9

The algorithm "saw" Elaine 6 seconds before it hit her.  The algorithm wasn't written to side on caution ... slowing down to take more time to resolve its confusion.  The algorithm was written in such a way that it simply continued on "full steam ahead".  The algorithm had disabled the Automated Emergency Braking (AEB) system.  The AEB was supposed to be explicitly deactivated only at speeds under 40 mph, yet the algorithm had the car traveling at 41 mph.  Finally, the AEB itself may have been miscoded to explicitly disregard objects in the lane ahead for which the component of their speed in the direction of the lane centerline is sensed to be zero. Please don't write code that does that!.  Much of this miscoding by those that devise, chart and write these algorithms is out of a tendency to prefer comfort over safety/caution. 

The act of driving down a road naturally involves the encounter with numerous objects for which "their speed in the direction of the lane centerline" is in fact zero.  These are all of the stationary objects one encounters when traveling.  Buildings along the side of the road, parked cars, telephone poles, picket fences, pedestrians waiting patiently for the light to change, etc. Unfortunately, the sensors that sense these objects, including LiDAR, are not perfect (nothing is), and will, while rarely, misplace these objects as being in the lane ahead.   Moreover, there are stationary object that are indeed correctly sensed to be in the lane ahead, but these can readily be passed under... overhead signs, tree canopies and overpasses.  Consequently, none of these stationary objects pose any danger.  They can readily be passed under if they are really in the lane ahead and can be readily bypassed, if they are mis-located common stationary objects that line the road ahead...   Unless it really is an object whose "speed in the direction of the lane centerline" is zero and it is really located in the lane ahead, as it was with Elaine Herzberg....  and with the rash of Tesla crashes with trucks sprawled across the lane ahead, firetrucks and police cruisers parked in the lane ahead, NJ barriers located in the center of an inappropriately striped exit lane, and trees in the lawn ahead. 

Luckily, stationary objects in travel lanes are extremely rare, but, unfortunately, sensors and algorithms much more often mis-position objects in the lane ahead that are actually beside the lane, not in the lane.  To avoid the "discomfort" of slowing down to be sure, these algorithms have been written to disregard, rather than be careful. 

I my view, it is those that have written and implemented these algorithms that are the true folks that are "responsible" for this tragic crash.  They didn't have to write the algorithms that way.  They could have written them to be better and more rarely mis-position stationary object.  Moreover, they knew they had a problem here, because the code over-simplistically and irresponsibly dismisses its shortcoming.  It is the way this code was written that caused this crash.  The code required Rafaela to save it from this disaster.  I doubt that Raphaela was informed about this fundamental shortcoming in the code.

Consequently, my ethics side that she is wrongfully charged.  Whether or not the algorithm designers and coders need to be charged, is another question.  They certainly should be aware that they are complicit here.  So should the Society of Automotive Engineers who preaches "cause no harm' and thus suggest that one never brake when one shouldn't be braking.  The person who is tailgating you may rear-end you. In a perfect world, then maybe.  But, all of us, except for maybe SAEers, get confused, miss identify, mis locate and hopefully we all do hit the brakes at least a little to give us some time to get things straight.  This philosophy should also apply to these automated gizmos.  Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">  Knight Smart Cities Lab 2021

Many, July 30, "At the 2021 Knight Smart Cities Lab, we'll help community leaders and technologists explore how to leverage federal funding, data and digital technology to help make strong decisions and improve quality of life for residents in 2021 and beyond...."  Read more Hmmmm... Sorry I didn't link earlier.  I hope that the Knight Foundation posts the recordings of the sessions, especially PANEL  4: EQUITY & MOBILITY — AV ROUND-TABLE  It was very good, although the tendency continues to be one of "educating communities"... selling them what we think is good for them, rather than being educated by communities that, for whatever reason, can't or wish not to drive a car: "What improvement(s) would you like to come about in the way you currently travel to the places you go to frequently?"  "What improvement(s) would you like to come about in the way you currently travel to the places you go to infrequently that would cause you to travel to those places more often?"  and, "What improvement(s) would you like to come about in new ways to travel that would cause you to travel to places you'd like to go to but have chosen to not go there?" 

If we are really trying to deploy a system that improves the quality of life of those that have been mobility marginalized by the personal automobile, then that system needs to be designed and deployed to address the questions above. Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">   Crash victim had posted videos riding in Tesla on Autopilot

J. Albert, July 31, "The driver of a Tesla involved in a fatal crash that California highway authorities said may have been on operating on Autopilot posted social media videos of himself riding in the vehicle without his hands on the wheel or foot on the pedal.

The May 5 crash in Fontana, a city 50 miles (80 kilometers) east of Los Angeles, is also under investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The probe is the 29th case involving a Tesla that the federal agency has probed.

In the Fontana crash, a 35-year-old man identified as Steven Michael Hendrickson was killed when his Tesla Model 3 struck an overturned semi on a freeway about 2:30 a.m ..." Read more Hmmmm...Here goes the broken record again... why is AutoPilot being blamed when it is the job of the Automated Emergency Braking (AEB) system to keep the car from crashing into stationary objects ahead???  I think that most, if not everyone, of those 29 crashes involve crashes with stationary objects in the lane ahead and most, if not all, show no engagement of the AEB system to prevent or mitigate the crash.  Why doesn't Tesla's AEB work?????????? Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="156" height="24">  Review: A deep new history of Tesla takes the shine off Elon Musk

R. Mitchell, July 30, "Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook and Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk are talking on the phone. The 2016 unveiling of the make-it-or-break-it Model 3 is coming soon, but Tesla is in serious financial trouble. Cook has an idea: Apple buys Tesla.

Musk is interested, but one condition: "I'm CEO".

Sure, says Cook. When Apple bought Beats in 2014, it kept on the founders, Jimmy Iovine and Dr. Dre.

No, Musk says. Apple. Apple CEO.

"F... you" Cook says, and hangs up...

So goes the juiciest allegation in "Power Play: Tesla, Elon Musk and the Bet of the Century" by Wall Street Journal reporter Tim Higgins. The secondhand anecdote is atypical in a way "Higgins doesn't break much news or gossip" but it also nicely encapsulates this sweeping history of the electric-car juggernaut, a company that often seems to innovate and thrive in spite of its founder rather than as a result of his vaunted genius..."  Read more Hmmmm...Very interesting!!!! See SDC PodCast/ZoomCast with Tim Higgins.  Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="110" height="23">  Study dispels myth that electric cars pollute as much as gas-powered cars due to 'dirty' grid

F. Lambert, July 21, "A new study dispels the persistent myth that electric cars pollute just as much as gas-powered cars because they charge on a "dirty" electric grid, and mining for battery materials is polluting.

While electric cars have no tailpipe emissions, unlike vehicles equipped with an internal combustion engine, they still pollute through the energy needed to produce them, like any other product, and with the electricity used to charge them if it's not renewable.

However, it has been commonly understood that electric vehicles are still more efficient than their gas-powered counterparts throughout their entire life cycle despite those sources of emissions.... " Read more Hmmmm...Unfortunately, I don't agree.  Since the process involves the replacement of an ICE with an EV, the EV must be burdened with the emissions associated with the additional electricity that it will consume, and not the average electricity that it will consume.  In order to address the climate issues, as new clean energy sources come on-line, the most polluting means of generating electricity are being turned off in order to most sustainably serve current electricity users. Thus the electricity used by each new user is responsible for turning back on the source that was most recently turned off... thus, that EV that you bought instead of an ICE burns the least sustainable energy.. today that is coal.  Tomorrow, when ever that is, that least sustainable electricity may well be solar, but that day only comes when all other users of electricity use solar or something even less polluting.  Just trying to be fair here.   Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">  A Carnegie Mellon Ro botics Professor Untangles a Tesla, the Moon and a Streetlight

H. Spitzer, July 28, "With autonomous vehicles, one of the fundamental elements of creating a safe and capable self-driving system (SDS) is being able to accurately perceive all objects in the car's environment.

Recently, a Tesla owner cruising down a California highway received a surprising notification on their car's dashboard display. The vehicle's Autopilot driver-assist system spotted the moon high in the sky, perfectly circular and tinted yellow in a haze of wildfire smoke, and made an incorrect assumption: yellow traffic signal ahead!

To identify and navigate traffic signals, Tesla's Autopilot relies solely on visual interpretation in the moment, an approach spotlighted in its misperception of the moon.  In contrast to driver-assist, the approach taken by self-driving system developers like Argo AI, Waymo, and Aurora, uses a combination of data from multiple sensors and high-definition 3D maps to avoid mistaking streetlights for moonlight. ..."  Read more Hmmmm... Largely click-bait...  I'm sure Prof. Ramanan did not say that Lidar never mis-identifies objects and didn't suggest that Tesla doesn't re-evaluate what it sees many times during the course of each and every second.  He also did not suggest that he's never mis-identified something.  The challenge here is that when you have n different things focused on answering a question, which answer do you choose if there isn't unanimous agreement?  One doesn't know if the answer is correct even if it all sensors return the same answer.  When they disagree, which is chosen?  There is an algorithm someplace that makes that choice.  I suspect that Tesla looked at this part of their code and realized that this part of the algorithm usually/always favored image processing over radar signal processing if there was disagreement. If that is/was the case, then radar is useless when trying to answer this question.  This situation must have existed for many questions which would lead anyone to realize, radar is expendable.  A long time ago, Elon saw Lidar as being expendable for probably the same reason


 C'mon Man!  (These folks didn't get/read the memo)


Sunday Supplement


Half-Baked


Click-Bait


More On....

Re-see:  [log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">  Pop Up Metro USA Intro 09 2020

H. Poser'77, Sept 13, 2020.  "Creating Value for Light Density Urban Rail Lines"  . See slidesSee video Hmmmm... Simply Brilliant.  Alain

imap:<a href=[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.5&filename=lmjdiniodjkflpia.png" class="" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" width="38" height="42" border="0">   4th Annual Princeton SmartDrivingCar Summit  It is over!!!  Now time to actually do something in the Trentons of this world.  

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="126" height="36">  Making Driverless Happen: The Road Forward (Updated)

K. Pyle, April 18, "It's time to hit the start button," is Fred Fishkin's succinct way of summarizing the next steps in the Smart Driving Car journey. Fiskin, along with the LA Times' Russ Mitchell co-produced the final session of the 2021 Smart Driving Car Summit, Making It Happen: Part 2. This 16th and final session in this multi-month online conference not only provided a summary of the thought-provoking speakers, but also provided food for thought on a way forward to bring mobility to "the Trentons of the World."

Setting the stage for this final session, Michael Sena provided highlights of the Smart Driving Car journey that started in late December 2020.  Safety, high-quality, and affordable mobility, particularly for those who do not have many options, was a common theme to the 2021 Smart Driving Car Summit. As Princeton Professor Kornhauser, the conference organizer put it,....." Read more  Hmmmm.... We had another excellent Session.  Thank you for the summary, Ken!  Alain

Kornhauser & He, April 2021 "Making it Happen:  A Proposal for Providing Affordable, High-quality, On-demand Mobility for All in the "Trentons" of this World"
Orf467F20_FinalReport "Analyzing Ride-Share Potential and Empty Repositioning Requirements of a Nationwide aTaxi System"
Kornhauser & He, March 2021 "AV 101 + Trenton Affordable HQ Mobility Initiative"


Calendar of Upcoming Events

imap:<a href=[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.5&filename=lmjdiniodjkflpia.png" class="" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" width="46" height="52" border="0"> 
5th Annual Princeton  SmartDrivingCar Summit
Fall 2021
Live in Person
Tentaively: November 2 (evening) -> 4, 2021

On the More Technical Side
K. Lockean's AV Research Group at U of Texas

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="22" height="22">  and  [log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="56" height="22">   The SYMPOSIUM ON THE FUTURE NETWORKED CAR 2021 VIRTUAL EVENT

 R. Shields, 22 - 25 March, "Recordings from the conference:
Read more  Hmmmm...  Russ, thank you for sharing!  Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="62" height="63">

These editions re sponsored by the SmartETFs Smart Transportation and Technology ETF, symbol MOTO. For more information head to www.motoetf.com  

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 225, Zoom-Cast Episode 225 w/Kevin Biesty, Deputy Director for Policy @ Arizona DoT

F. Fishkin, July 22, "Chandler, Arizona is the one place where paying customers can take advantage of driverless robo-taxis (from Waymo) to get where they are going.   How did that happen?  What does the future hold?   Kevin Biesty, Arizona's  Deputy Director for Policy at the Department of Transportation,  joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin for an in depth discussion.   Plus.. Ford, Argo, Lyft, Tesla, Mercedes & more. "

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 224, Zoom-Cast Episode 224  w/Selika Josiah Talbot, Principal, Autonomous Vehicle Consulting

F. Fishkin, July 19, "Does there need to be a White House appointed autonomous and electric vehicle  czar to open up new mobility possibilities for all?   That's the view of Selika Josiah Talbott..a government veteran who now heads Autonomous Vehicle Consulting and lectures at American University.   She joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin for a deeper look at how the technology can be deployed to improve lives.

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 223, Zoom-Cast Episode 223  w/Richard Mudge, Compass Transp.  & Baruch Feigenbaum, Reason Foundation

F. Fishkin, July 15, "Can Tesla (and others) make automatic emergency braking work?    Princeton's Alain Kornhauser continues his push and is joined by the Reason Foundation's Baruch Feigenbaum and Compass Transportation & Technology President Dick Mudge along with co-host Fred Fishkin to explore this week'ss Transportation Research Board sessions. "

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 222, Zoom-Cast Episode 222 

F. Fishkin, July 11, "Is it time for autopilot to not break the law?   Princeton's Alain Kornhauser says yes.  And if technology can save lives, prevent injuries and crashes…shouldn’t it?  Plus Richard Branson, Jeff Bezos, Waymo, VW and more on Episode 222 of Smart Driving Cars with co-host Fred Fishkin. "

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 221, Zoom-Cast Episode 221    w/Mark Rosekind, Chief Safety Innovation Officer, Zoox

F. Fishkin, July 1, "With Zoox…the Amazon owned autonomous mobility company out with a comprehensive safety report.. Chief Safety Innovation Officer Dr. Mark Rosekind joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin.   What is so different about the Zoox approach to building a vehicle and safety?   What is the company’s vision for future mobility and transportation.    Dr. Rosekind fills us in on those issues and more.

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 220, Zoom-Cast Episode 220    w/John Thornhill, Innovation Editor, Financial Times

F. Fishkin, July 1, "Sociology not technology will decide the electric car race.    That's a Financial Times headline from a piece written by Innovation Editor John Thornhill...who joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for a lively discussion on that...plus Tesla...autonomous mobility and more.   John is also the founder of Sifted.eu.

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 219, Zoom-Cast Episode 219    w/Michael Sena, Editor, The Dispatcher

F. Fishkin, June 29 , "Why couldn't a smart driving car prevent Alain's crash with a deer?   How important is exact location for highly automated driving?   And NHTSA wants reports on all automated vehicle system crashes.  The Dispatcher publisher Michael Sena joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for that and more.

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 218, Zoom-Cast Episode 218    w/Xinfeng Le, Waymo Product Manager

F. Fishkin, June 10 , "Have questions about Waymo’s partnership with JB Hunt to test autonomous trucks in Texas?  So do we…and Waymo’s Product Manager, Xinfeng Le joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin to provide answers.   Plus.. Waymo raises 2 and a half billion dollars, MacKenzie Scott gives away billions, start-up Waabi comes out of stealth, Argo AI plans an IPO and more. "

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 217, Zoom-Cast Episode 217    w/Christorpher Mims, Columnist, Wall Street Journal

F. Fishkin, June 7 , "Are self-driving cars still decades ahead?  Wall Street Jopurnal columnist and author Christopher Mims joins Princeton’s Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin for a look at the progress and roadblocks.  Plus the latest on Tesla, Cruise, the dramatic rise in road deaths during Covid and more. "

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 216, Zoom-Cast Episode 216    w/Michael Sena, editor The Dispatcher

F. Fishkin, May 28 , "The Future of Mobility is Slowly Coming Into Focus.  That's on top in the June edition of The Dispatcher.   From Sweden, publisher Michael Sena joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for that plus better batteries, May Mobility, Tesla and more. 

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 215, Zoom-Cast Episode 215    w/Cade Metz, Correspondent, NY Times & Ken Pyle, editor, Viodi.com

F. Fishkin, May 27 , "The Costly Pursuit of Self Driving Cars Continues On and On and On.  That's the headline of a NY Times story this week.  The reporter, Cade Metz, also the author of a new book on artificial intelligence, joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser, co-host Fred Fishkin and guest Ken Pyle of Viodi View.."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 214, Zoom-Cast Episode 214 

F. Fishkin, May 23 , "An interview with the chief engineer behind Ford's F150 Lightning EV truck...Waymo shares rider stories and the AFL-CIO tells Congress autonomous vehicles should be required to have human operators. Join Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for those stories and more.

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 213, Zoom-Cast Episode 213  w/Robbie Diamond; Founder, Securing America's Future Energy

F. Fishkin, May 14 , "The autonomous mobility competition with China.  What will it take to succeed?  Securing America's Future Energy founder Robbie Diamond dives in with Princeton's Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin.  Plus the latest on #AutoX,  #Tesla,  #GM, #TuSimple and more.   Remember to subscribe!   And check out this SAFE panel discussion too.  "..

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 212, Zoom-Cast Episode 212  w/Ken Pyle

F. Fishkin, May 8 , "Where does Waymo go from here?   Is GM really going to market personal autonomous vehicles?   Viodi View managing editor Ken Pyle joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin for a look at those issues plus Volkswagen, Tesla, Argo and more.

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 211, Zoom-Cast Episode 211  w/ Michael Sena, Editor of The Dispatcher

F. Fishkin, May 1 , "There's plenty of combustion around the issue of banning internal combustion engines (ICE). Consultant and The Dispatcher publisher Michael Sena joins us for a look at what makes sense...and what doesn't. Plus #Tesla, #Toyota, #Volkswagen, #Baidu and progress in Florida. ..."

  SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 210, Zoom-Cast Episode 210  w/Ken Pyle & Louis Aaron'23

F. Fishkin, April 26 , "Passengers at the Las Vegas Convention Center are about to get their first taste of the new underground mobility service from #Elon​ Musk's The Boring Company.    Princeton student Louis Aaron has been working there and he joins Viodi View Managing Editor Ken Pyle, Princeton's Alain .."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 209, Zoom-Cast Episode 209  w/Clifford Winston, Brookings Inst.

F. Fishkin, April , "The Texas #Tesla crash that killed two continues to make headlines. The impact on the electric and automated vehicle industries? From the Brookings Institution, senior fellow Clifford Winston joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for a look at what the real focus should be on.."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 208, Zoom-Cast Episode 208  w/Prof. Stephen Still, U. of Buffalo

F. Fishkin, April 18, "What does it take to bring about mobility for all in the real world? With help from the federal DOT and a team at the University of Buffalo...some big steps are being taken there. Professor Stephen Still joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for that...plus, Tesla, Uber, Cruise and more on Smart Driving Cars."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 207, Zoom-Cast Episode 207  w/Selika Josiah Talbott

F. Fishkin, April 10 , "When a driverless vehicle crashes...what should passengers, other vehicle owners, law enforcement and first responders do? American University Professor Selika Josiah Talbott says the time for planning is now. She joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for that plus Tesla, Apple and more in the latest Smart Driving Cars."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 206, Zoom-Cast Episode 206  w/Stan Young, National Renewable Energy Laboratory

F. Fishkin, April 2, "When it comes to future mobility, what will fuel the vehicles?   How can the shortcomings of electric vehicles be overcome?   Stanley Young, Mobility Systems team lead for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin..."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 205, Zoom-Cast Episode 205  w/Michael Sena; Editor The Dispatcher.  President, MLSena Consulting

F. Fishkin, March 26, "Every driverless car should take the same tests that we take..and have the same responsibilities.   So says Michael L. Sena in the latest edition of The Dispatcher.  He joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for that plus the latest from Tesla and more...on Episode 205 of Smart Driving Cars..."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 204, Zoom-Cast Episode 204  w/Andrew Rose, President, OnStar Insurance Services  

F. Fishkin, March 15, ".With GM aiming to upend the car insurance industry, the President of the automaker's new OnStar Insurance Services, Andrew Rose joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin. What advantages will OnStar insurance bring to the table...and a look at the future of auto insurance.."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 203, Zoom-Cast Episode 203   AV 101: A. Kornhauser

F. Fishkin, March 13, ".GM's move to transform auto insurance through OnStar Insurance:   Is it a win, win for all?      Is adaptive cruise control prompting some drivers to speed?     And what does Tesla really mean by "full self driving"?   Just some of the questions tackled  in the latest edition of Smart Driving Cars with Princeton's Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 202, Zoom-Cast Episode 202 President & CEO, RoadDB

F. Fishkin, March 3, "When will we be able to purchase cars that can largely drive themselves?  It may not be long...but don't expect to vacate the driver's seat.  That's the view of entrepreneur, tech pioneer and RoadDB CEO Russ Shields.   He takes an in depth look at where we are and where we're headed with Princeton's Alain Kornhauser & co-host Fred Fishkin."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 201, Zoom-Cast Episode 201 w/Michael Sena, Publisher of The Dispatcher

F. Fishkin, Feb. 26, "Smarter cars need smarter assembly...and location matters.   The Dispatcher publisher Michael Sena joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for a look at that, politics, climate and carmakers...plus Tesla, Velodyne, Foxconn and more.."

SmartDrivingCars Pod-Cast Episode 200, Zoom-Cast Episode 200 w/Edwin Olsen, CEO, May Mobility

F. Fishkin, Feb. 22, "How May Mobility is building confidence in autonomous transportation and creating a road map for growth through the pandemic and beyond.   CEO and co-founder Edwin Olson joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for that and more."


Recent Highlights of:

imap:<a href=[log in to unmask]:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E3022058?part=1.2&filename=hejedgabmgkdglfj.png" class="" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" width="93" height="55" border="0">

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="126" height="36">  Upward Urban & Rural Mobility via Autonomous Mobility

K. Pyle, July 19, "It is said that a picture is worth a thousand words. The picture Selika Josiah Talbott chose for her virtual backdrop at the recent 2021 TRB Annual Automated Road Transportation Symposium sums up the mobility challenges that urban and rural locales face with existing infrastructure, particularly in low-income areas. Joining Talbott on this panel were experts opining on Talbott’s insightful comments about autonomous mobility and its potential to provide upward mobility...."  Read more  Hmmmm...  Simply a must read.  This is the real market for autonomousTaxis (aTaxis). Alain

Saturday, July 17, 2021

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="74" height="16">   2021 TRB Annual Automated Road Transportation Symposium

July 12 -> 15, "..."  Read more  Hmmmm...I haven't been able to find a public source for any of the content from the symposium but there were at least three sessions (of the few that I was able to attend) that were really good.  One was B-101- An inside Look at Policy-Making for Automated Vehicles, moderated by Baruch Feigenbaum of the Reason Foundation.  Pay particular attention to the insights offered by Kevin Biesty of Arizona DoT.  So far, no one in the world has done it better.

A second one was B204-Inclusive by Design: Creating an Equitable and Accessible Automated Future, moderated by Charlotte Frei.

The third was Richard Mudge's   B402- Shark Tank: Everything from Free Freight to AV for Low-Income Travelers to how many AV Firms will Survive?. (Spoil alert... the answer is  [log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="16" height="15"> . Selika Talbot's presentation was absolutely fantastic.  See PodCast/ZoomCast below for a discussion of parts of this session. Fred and I hope to do PodCasts/ZoomCasts with Selika and Kevin in the coming week.

Hopefully TRB will broadly distribute the recorded videos of these and the other sessions.  One caution is that even in this community there is substantial confusion introduced over terminology which ends up having people talk by rather than with each other.  This was an "Automated Road Transportation" symposium.  One aspect of road transportation is the fundamental role of the human driver.  It is very different than that of elevators that go from A to B without any direct human driver/operator intervention.  The customer only tells the elevator what floor to go to.  Everything else in the up/down mobility process is automated within the elevator's Operational Design Domain (which is usually in a shaft, stooping only at designated stopping locations (floors) with centimeter accuracy but only when when sufficient power exists to perform the various operations.  (Note: "Level 5 elevators" (operate under any power-available condition) will "never" exist.).  It is easy for us to see the phenomenal difference in the societal value that can be achieved in elevators that deliver safe, shared-ride, on-demand 24/7 mobility, indiscriminately to essentially everyone.  Unfortunately, precious little of that broad societal value can be achieved unless the elevator's safe operation can be achieved without a human operator/driver. 

This is a bang-bang situation.  Either you have it or you don't.  Coming close doesn't cut it.

It doesn't mean that human operated elevators don't deliver value to individual owners.  My neighbor across the street has a dumbwaiter in her house that she and her husband control manually to move things including themselves up and down in their house.  Works great.  Real value. They both remain capable of performing the manual operations for themselves and if they charge themselves for the labor, they gain that charge so the transaction nets to zero labor cost.  charge themselves .  While some benefits (comfort & convenience) might be gained by them by automating some of the operating functions, full automation would be silly unless at least some number of neighbors would improve their quality-of-life if only they could easily go up and down in their house.  That latent demand for improved quality-of-life does exist in tall buildings.  It's been consumed in a large part because elevators became operatorless and not just operator assisted.  Shared and not quite door2door shortcomings are endured.  24/7, on-demand, affordable (especially for the rent payer on the "14th" floor.  So much so that they just pick up the tab for the elevators that deliver accessibility to/from the "14th floor") are the fundamental mobility attributes that totally dominate the competition for mobility afforded by the stairwell.  Without the elimination of the operator/driver, the 24/7, on-demand, affordable trifecta is not deliverable to anybody. 

Way too often during the Symposium automation that explicitly requires the continued presence of a driver and is only at best a comfort & convenience feature  as ascribed benefits that accrue only for systems that achieve safe driverless operation.  There is no getting away from it, automation that assist drivers is radically different than automation that replaces drivers.    Hopefully next year we can have 2 AV conferences.  One that focuses on automation to assist human drivers and one that focuses on technology and deployments that replaces the driver. 

As far as connectivity goes, we need to realize that it is a nice2have, not a need2have.  Since it can only deliver value among pairs of adopters, it struggles getting started by itself when it needs to find a partner.  Unfortunately, road vehicles have performed well for more than 100 years without much connectivity and automation at this point is saying: you aren't much help and we can't afford to carry you along.  Alain

Sunday, July 11, 2021

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="50" height="39">  Tesla Says Autopilot Makes Its Cars Safer. Crash Victims Say It Kills.

Neal Boudette, July 5, " Benjamin Maldonado and his teenage son were driving back from a soccer tournament on a California freeway in August 2019 when a truck in front of them slowed. Mr. Maldonado flicked his turn signal and moved right. Within seconds, his Ford Explorer pickup was hit by a Tesla Model 3 that was traveling about 60 miles per hour on Autopilot.

A six-second video captured by the Tesla and data it recorded show that neither Autopilot — Tesla’s much-vaunted system that can steer, brake and accelerate a car on its own — nor the driver slowed the vehicle until a fraction of a second before the crash..."  Read more   Hmmmm... A few comments here:
1.  Because of the suit here, hopefully more of the data associated with this crash will be made public.  Future crashes such as  these seem to be covered by the recent NHTSA standing General Order requiring the data to be released  without need of lawyers, assuming Tesla cooperates.
2.  Neal (slightly) overstate his plot which clearly shows the Tesla began to decelerate slightly more than a full second before impact. He also doesn't mention what the video clearly shows that the Tesla was "cut-off" by the pickup truck.  More over the pickup applied its brakes as it was making the lane change (brake light came on).  This brake application may well have been the critical element that made the crash unavoidable.  AutoPilot was likely tacking the pickup from at least the 6 seconds before collision point.  Tesla must have data on the relative longitudinal speed between the pickup and the Tesla.and it must also have an expected time-to-collision which is a critical measure as to when to kick in the Automated Emergency Braking System. Once again, my main concern here is not (yet) about the performance of AutoPilot, but the performance of Tesla's Automated Emergency Braking System (AEBS).  This is a rear-end crash.  It is the responsibility of the AEBS to avert these crashes.  Seems as if the AEBS did NOT properly anticipate the pick-up's maneuver nor properly monitor time-to-collision.  My recommendation here is to improve the AEBS.
3.  Comments implying that radar would have been better at identifying the 'cut-off' are questionable.  Lane intrusion is only partial until about 3 seconds before impact. Radar does not return lateral relative-speed, only longitudinal relative-speed.  Who knows what lag exists in determining lateral speed and the accuracy of that determination.  I doubt that either are very good web based on radar.  My guess is that image processing at better than 20Hz would do best in this clear situation. 
4.  Interpretation of the turn signal can only be done with image processing (to my knowledge.) 
5.  Nothing is reported about any horn actuation (or if autoPilot even uses the horn). The brake application by the pickup may have been an impulsive response to a horn blow by the Tesla. 
6.  There seems to be no indication by the driver of the pick-up that he saw the Tesla coming. 
7.  The Tesla data likely also has its closing speed on the panel truck and thus the closing speed of the pick-up to the panel truck.  This information may help us to begin to understand the extent to which the pickup was tailgating the panel truck.
8.  To me, AutoPilot's main issue is: should it allow "passing on the right" when "passing on the right" is illegal.  The reason it is illegal is because it leads to crashes like this one,  that is an issue that should be taken up by NHTSA and NTSB.  To what extent should any of these automated driving devices engage in "illegal" driving?  My current view (subject to change) is:
    a. Up to 9 mph over is OK.
    b.  Rolling through a stop sign is OK, if it is determined that time to any likely collision is greater than 5 seconds (meaning you must be able to "see" at least 5 seconds away at speed limit +9 (or something similar)
    c.   Cross double line as long  as oncoming traffic has slowed to under 25 mph and has room to proceed by squeezing right (or something like that). 
    d.   Pass on the right as long as all pertinent vehicles in the two lanes are moving at less than 25 mph (or something like that).
Alain

Friday, July 2, 2021

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="174" height="24">  Sociology not technology will decide the electric car race

J. Thornhill,  June 24,  "Brimming with epic successes and spectacular failures, the early history of the motor car industry offers clues about its future, too. As so often during technological revolutions, initial bursts of fast and furious experimentation by wild-eyed pioneers are followed by waves of industry consolidation by more sober corporate types.

So it was in the US from the 1890s, when scores of obsessive entrepreneurs launched the modern auto industry. Over the next few decades they founded hundreds of companies manufacturing thousands of different models. In the words of one historian, these dedicated enthusiasts competed in a “drastically Darwinian” world and seemed to prefer “to go broke making automobiles than get rich doing anything else”, a tune which resonates again today.

But the development of capital-intensive mass manufacturing methods, the Great Depression and the second world war thinned out the competition. By 1950, the industry was dominated by just three giant corporations: General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, which between them accounted for about three-quarters of global production.

Today, the car industry is opening up once again to new entrants amid another technological convulsion as electric and connected vehicles — and maybe eventually autonomous cars — replace combustion engine motors driven by humans. As this revolution unfolds, we are seeing another burst of creative competition as entrepreneurial start-ups and tech companies flood into the market. ...

The industry’s dream is to create an attractive and reliable $25,000 electric car that overcomes range anxiety. As Alain Kornhauser, a professor at Princeton University, says, the winners will be those who can build cars that appeal to everyday drivers as well as the “greasers and truckers”. “It’s all about the sociology, not the technology,” he adds.

In other words, it will be, as it has always been throughout history, the customer who decides."  Read more   Hmmmm... Same for Driverless AVs.  Alain

Monday, June 28, 2021

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="133" height="21">  How Important is Exact Localization for HAD?

M. Sena,  July/Aug. '21, "In this issue of The Dispatcher for July and August, I have taken up a subject in the lead article that has been on my list for quite some time. It is of how cars that drive themselves keep themselves on the road while they make their journey to their destination. It turns out that there is a very good reason why Teslas crash and Waymo is running around only in Chandler, Arizona after people who didn’t know better promised that there would be completely driverless cars on all roads a decade ago: localization of a moving vehicle is very, very hard, even for a human.

I encourage you to read Musings this month. It’s about making the journey to a world without climate change protests, a world where they either won’t be necessary or allowed. On most journeys, we have to cross bridges. Sometimes we have to make them ourselves. Think of the article as the first bridge to cross toward a better understanding of the climate change journey.

Dispatch Central contains, as usual, something for everyone. Insurance is addressed in the two main articles. In Bits and Pieces I have added my thoughts on recent events.

This is a double issue, in part because we are going to try to do more this summer than we could do last. But it’s also because I need some extra time to work on a follow-up to the Princeton SmartDrivingCars Summit with Professor Alain Kornhauser. There was a concrete proposal put forward by Professor Kornhauser during the last session, and many of us who took part in the Summit have committed to try to work on implementing that proposal. Read more  Hmmmm... .   Once again an outstanding The Dispatcher.  I happen to have a diffent fundamental view on"exact localization than Michael, many and possibly even everyone else...  As usual, I'll take a very self-centered view...  I've lived my whole life without knowing (or caring to know) my "exact location".  I've been satisfied to know: "sort of... where am I?" but exact...where am I? ... not so much.  What  troubles me about the "exact where am I" is that this exactness is in some coordinate system.  Where is the origin of that coordinate system and is moving?  Oh, it's the "center" of the earth??  Or some "reference point".  So "exact" is actually, "exact relative to some reference point.  Little seems to ever be said about the "exactness" of the reference point, but that may actually be some saving grace about "exact".. it is "exact" relative to some reference point.

I see..  If the reference point is the center of the Universe, then I'd better be really-really precise; else, small small changes mean big-big differences. If the reference is the center of the earth, then I may just need to be really precise; else, small changes  mean big differences.  However, if the reference point is my nose and I'm trying to stay between two white lines and not hit anything, then the precision to which I need to know where things are may not need to be very precise as long as I have a little bit of leeway and still stay between the lines and leave enough room around the various objects to not hit them. 

OK, safe driving requires only knowing where I am relative to objects around me to a moderate level of precision.  I can do it in two ways... take the difference between two values: location of object and my location. The farther away the reference point, the more precise they will need to be if precision of the difference is to be maintained.  Consequently, if the measurements are relative to my nose, the need for about as small as it can get. 

Moreover, any precision data base lacks some "most" important values.. 1.  a precise value for my location and 2. a precise value for anything around me that moves (meaning it wasn't at its current location when the HD database was assembled).  Required is the ability in real time to locate and track objects relative to me (my nose, the hood ornament of my car, ..) with only some precision These objects and their location aren't included in these precise/HD databases.  What is needed is a very reliable means of identifying objects and determining their position and velocity with little latency. This is absolutely necessary;uyr;y necessary for the moving objects, might as well do it also for the stationary objects.  😁 Alain

Please don't suggest that one needs an HD map database in order to run their SLAM (Simultaneous Localization And Mapping)  algorithm. That algorithm needs as input the relative position (sensor observations) of objects . The capability to determine those inputs is all that is needed to do collision avoidance, so don't even bother going through the SLAM computation and certainly don't pay for a reference data set.


[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="156" height="24">  Are self-driving cars safe? Highway regulator orders industry to cough up the data

R. Mitchell, June 29, "After years of inaction, the federal government will begin collecting crash data on automated vehicles.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on Tuesday ordered dozens of car, truck and technology companies to inform the agency of a serious crash within a day of learning about it, with a more complete data report due after 10 days.

The order will enable NHTSA to “collect information necessary for the agency to play its role in keeping Americans safe on the roadways, even as the technology deployed on the nation’s roads continues to evolve,” the agency said.

The order applies to highly automated vehicles, including robotic cars that don’t require a human driver, as well as partially automated systems such as Tesla’s Autopilot and General Motors’ Super Cruise with advanced cruise control and automatic steering.

It immediately affects the partially automated so-called Level 2 systems increasingly common on new vehicles from most major manufacturers. The number of fully robotic cars and trucks now deployed on public roads is tiny, but the market is expected to grow dramatically in coming years.

Manufacturers tout the safety and convenience of automated vehicles, but scant useful data have been collected to demonstrate how safe they are.

“This is very important. It’s fantastic. And it’s about time,” said Alain Kornhauser, who heads the automated vehicle engineering program at Princeton University. “Safety should not be a competition. It’s a cooperation.”...

“Nobody should push back on this,” Princeton’s Kornhauser said. “We don’t know what we don’t know, we don’t know what works and doesn’t work, and this allows us to begin to know that.”..."  Read more  Hmmmm... I couldn't have said it better myself. 😁 Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">  Self-Driving Cars Could Be Decades Away, No Matter What Elon Musk Said

C. Mims, June 5, "..." Read more  Hmmmm... Not to be defensive, but I will be...

"In 2015, Elon Musk said self-driving cars that could drive “anywhere” would be here within two or three years."  ... According to my definition, from day-one (>9 years ago), of my 3 (very) different types of SmartDrivingCars:

  • Safe-driving Cars (Automation of Collision Avoidance on cars that we drive all the time.  Societal benefit is improved Safety),
  • Self-Driving Cars (Automation of Steering and Braking functions some of the time, in some places, but always requiring driver supervision. Societal benefit is Comfort & Convenience (and NOT any substantive Safety improvements), and
  • Driverless Cars able to go from some origins to some destinations at some times without a driver or attendant on board.  Societal benefit is delivering affordable high-quality mobility for almost anyone (and some/many things), from those origin-destination-time combinations.  (period!  Again, safety is a floor, not a substantive value proposition.)
Elon delivers, every day, "self-driving Tesla" with his autoPilot and FSD features.  They deliver very good "Comfort & Convenience" to Tesla owners as long as the driver continues to do their part... always supervise the Tesla's automation.  Cadillac also does it with its SuperCruise, Subaru with its EyeSight,  Mercedes with its 997 package, and ...

Automakers, Mad Men and modern day commercials seem to make it a habit to oversell and over promise.  I admit, Elon may well be at the asymptotic limit of that distribution, but everyone knows that he's way out there.   We consider him entertainment, just as we consider all the money we loose on Fan Duel and in Vegas to be an entertainment expense.  Caveat emptor

In 2016, Lyft CEO John Zimmer predicted they would “all but end” car ownership by 2025.

...  Hopefully by then, that thought will be in at least some minds.  Putting some blemish on what the  Mad Men created as an absolute human desire would be a substantial achievement....  

In 2018, Waymo CEO John Krafcik warned autonomous robocars would take longer than expected.

...  Nothing wrong here... 

In 2021, some experts aren’t sure when, if ever, individuals will be able to purchase steering-wheel-free cars that drive themselves off the lot...." 

...  From the beginning and continue today I argue that there is no market in the personal ownership of Driverless Cars.  Why own it???  I can't even drive it!!!  Just to sit in my driveway???  I'm going to make it a business???  I'll be the smallest businessman in the world, bearing on my shoulders the highest form of personal responsibility, the life & safety of my customer.  NOT GONNA HAPPEN!!!

Also... please, not everyone promised anything.  And I haven't even mentioned Steve Schladover who has been stalwart in his efforts to advance this technology in a realistic context.

The Society of Automotive Engineers had, and continue to have, an opportunity to bring realism to this community by, at the very least, simply dropping any reference to anything called "Level 5".  If SAE wishes to be humble and brave, they can also apologize for even suggesting that Level 5's "everywhere" could ever exist within the lifetimes of any current or soon to be member of SAE. By creating the category, SAE baited the Mad Men,  Sunday Supplementers and Click-Bait folks into  fantasizing  something envisioned by a reputable, serious organization.  

SAE, please edit your "Levels literature" by "whiting out" all reference to "Level 5" or adding after any Level 5 "NA".  While you're at it, do it also for "Level 3" because that's also a non-starter. Alain

Saturday, May 29, 2021

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="133" height="21">  The Future of Mobility is Slowly Coming into Focus

M. Sena, June 2021, "...Mobility-as-a-service would provide the business model to tie everything together, perhaps as an extension of your phone/broadband subscription. Private car ownership would soon be a relic of a bygone age.

This is an interesting narrative, but is not a correct one. Even before COVID-19 changed how people have been living outside of China since Friday, the 13th of March 2020, the picture of everything happening in high density cities was a rumor that companies like WEWORK spread to build their houses of cards. ...

One effect of changes that have occurred in where people live and work in and around big cities is a phenomenon that was already well underway before the pandemic but has sped up: the demise of inner city buses. I wrote about this in the December 2018 issue of THE DISPATCHER, Is It Time to Throw the Bus Under the Bus?. I wrote:
We need to start thinking outside the bus. If a city is serious about providing a useful bus service, it needs to run them everywhere and often, including at night. It must, therefore, get rid of cars driving and parking on its streets. ..

One effect of changes that have occurred in where people live and work in and around big cities is a phenomenon that was already well underway before the pandemic but has sped up: the demise of inner city buses. I wrote about this in the December 2018 issue of THE DISPATCHER, Is It Time to Throw the Bus Under the Bus?. I wrote:
We need to start thinking outside the bus. If a city is serious about providing a useful bus service, it needs to run them everywhere and often, including at night. It must, therefore, get rid of cars driving and parking on its streets. ... What cities are doing today all over the world is neither providing an adequate service to their citizens nor using the money allocated for transport in a cost-effective way...

Bite the bullet and get private cars off the big city streets
The reasons that people who live in cities began to buy cars was that they needed them to get to their jobs, the ones that began moving out of the cities in the ‘60s to ‘campuses’ where there were no transit links. Then they needed them to drop off their children to day care centers since both parents worked. Then they needed them to drop off their older children...

As I said, it is not buses that will meet the need. Neither is it roads filled with taxis. There are taxis offering rides in Trenton and Scranton, but they are not replacing buses because they are too expensive and are often unavailable when demand for them is highest. The Uber/Lyft model can be better at meeting demand, but they are still too costly..."
Read more  Hmmmm...   Enjoy the whole issue.  It is enormously well written! Also listen/watch the SDC Pod/Zoom Cast 216- below with Michael.  Alain

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="" width="50" height="39">  The Costly Pursuit of Self-Driving Cars Continues On. And On. And On.

C. Metz, May 24, "...  So what went wrong? Some researchers would say nothing — that’s how science works. You can’t entirely predict what will happen in an experiment. ... It's not an experiment if you can predict the outcome.  Why bother doing it??? 

More importantly, Mother Nature is involved and you don't know what she is going to throw at you.  Which is why simulations are not the complete answer...  They'll only regurgitate what you told them to do (which is somewhat useful because they implicate together the things that you thought you knew, giving you new insights.).  The challenge is, She's not involved in the simulation but She is every time you do it...  But that's life and that's what makes it exiting and worth living....  The self-driving car project just happened to be one of the most hyped technology experiments of this century, occurring on streets all over the country and run by some of its highest-profile companies....

Self-driving tech is not yet nimble enough to reliably handle the variety of situations human drivers encounter each day. It can usually handle suburban Phoenix, but it can’t duplicate the human chutzpah needed for merging into the Lincoln Tunnel in New York or dashing for an offramp on Highway 101 in Los Angele  ... True!   But getting it to work in the Nevada desert and then Pheonix is an enormous accomplishment.  Frank didn't just roll out of the womb and make it in New York. He also went through "..the blues..." where he could actually sing and be appreciated in the "..small towns..." before he made it in NYC.  It took GM about '12 seconds' to realize that the required human chutzpah was way to much to get started and they were outathere.   

“If you look at almost every industry that is trying to solve really, really difficult technical challenges, the folks that tend to be involved are a little bit crazy and little bit optimistic,” he said. “You need to have that optimism to get up every day and bang your head against the wall to try to solve a problem that has never been solved, and it’s not guaranteed that it ever will be solved.”  ... Absolutely true. By definition! (I also like to say that you need to be fundamentally stupid; else, you would have known how hard it was going to be and you would have just played golf or video games in your parent's basement...)

“These cars will be able to operate on a limited set of streets under a limited set of weather conditions at certain speeds,” said Jody Kelman, an executive at Lyft. “We will very safely be able to deploy these cars, but they won’t be able to go that many places.” ... Yup!! There is absolutely nothing bad about that.   Go someplace else.   It doesn't need to be much tougher that "Chandler". It doesn't really need to be any "bigger" than "Chandler".

Waymo needs what Chandler doesn't have.. Customers ... Definition: folks whose quality-of-life can be substantially improved by what Waymo's Technology can readily deliver today. )

That's the market side of this initiative that Silicon Valley seems to have forgotten.  Cool Technology doesn't happen, just because it is Technology.  Technology happens because it is Cool.  Cool is the value proposition, not Technology: else we'd have Segways and people wearing GoogleGlass all over the place. 

Assisted Driving (what I call Self-drivingCars, or, sorry, SAE Level 1 and Level 2, or Tesla AutoPilot) are Cool (That technology delivers Comfort and Convenience to those that can afford and wish to buy cars).  The buyer/customer just relies, for the most part, that engineers are making sure that the Technology works.  Customers demand that the Technology adds to what they already enjoy (Cool).  Their attention span is really short.  The "lipstick" wears off quickly.

For Driverless... not so much Cool in Chandler.  Maybe as a fling, or a tale, but actually, the negatives, largely outweigh the positives, think GoogleGlass.  Few move or stay in Chandler unless you have a car (~70% Households have 2 or more cars). 'everyone' has their own car.  So while the Waymo technology might work in Chandler, it doesn't have enough Waymophiles (customers for whom Waymo substantially improves what they already have for themselves) to make it a Go. 

However, take "Trenton".  70 % of the households have one or zero cars.  Many more Trentonians have the opportunity to appreciate the incremental value that Waymo will bring to their lives.  They will more easily become Waymophiles if Waymo delivers in Trenton what Waymo has well demonstrated the "Cool" that it can deliver in Chandler.  Even if Waymo shuts down until the few roads that it uses are plowed the few times it snows in Trenton.  Trenton is Waymos's (Ford/Argo & GM/Cruise as well) "New York".

In short... While Chandler is an ideal place for Waymo to start getting its Technology working, Trenton is a great place for them to deliver societal value, which is supposed to be the fundamental mission of these Google "X.Projects" ... ..."
...X’s primary output is breakthrough technologies that have the potential to transform people’s lives and become large, sustainable businesses."

It is time that Waymo begins to take what they've accomplished and actually begin to deliver primary output.  "Read more  Hmmmm...  Excellent.  Comments in line above.  Also Listen/Watch PodCast above.  Alain

Saturday, May 22, 2021

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">  Why I Ride with Waymo: Mike

Waymo One, May 13, "... I started taking it to work, and after crunching the numbers for gas, maintenance, insurance, upkeep, and owning a depreciating investment, it was pretty much a no-brainer that we really didn't need two cars. I sold off my car and made Waymo my choice for commuting to and from work and for trips my wife and I need to take when the other is using our car..." Read more  Hmmmm...This is really great that he "crunched the numbers" and found it to be "pretty much a no-brainer", which is what every real Waymo customer in Chandler has to do to become a Waymo customer.  One "doesn't move to Chandler unless one has "two cars".  See slide 5: 70% of the households have 2 or more cars in Chandler, so most of the folks have had to do the math to become a customer.  If Waymo offered the same service in Trenton, where 70% of the households have at most one car and 30% don't have any, then it doesn't take much number crunching to appreciate Waymo when walking is the next best way to go.

The Chandler Operational Design Domain (ODD) may be a great place to get the technology working.  It may well be the "easiest" ODD in the world.  A Trenton ODD may well not be all that much more difficult technologically.  What Trenton does have are customers for whom what Waymo can deliver is truly a no-brainer.  Alain

Saturday, May 15, 2021

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class=""> Autonomous Vehicles: A Framework for Deployment and Safety

R. Diamond, May 13, "Join SAFE for an event focused on the importance of autonomous vehicles to our national and economic security and outlining pathways for the safe deployment of autonomous vehicles.

The event will feature remarks from Dr. Steve Cliff, Acting Administrator of NHTSA, a discussion between industry leaders, and the release of a report, "A Regulatory Framework for AV Safety," by O. Kevin Vincent, Associate General Counsel, Regulatory at Lucid...."  Read more  Hmmmm... A must watch, complemented by the Vincent report and our latest PodCast below.  Alain

Saturday, May 8, 2021

[log in to unmask]" alt="" class="">  Why has’t Waymo expanded its driverless service? Here’s my theory

T. Lee, May 7, "Suburban ride-hailing is a lousy business to be in.

Last October, Waymo did something remarkable: the company launched a fully driverless commercial taxi service called Waymo One. Customers in a 50-square-mile corner of suburban Phoenix can now use their smartphones to hail a Chrysler Pacifica minivan with no one in the driver's seat.

And then... nothing. Seven months later, Waymo has neither expanded the footprint of the Phoenix service nor has it announced a timeline for launching in a second city.

It's as if Steve Jobs had unveiled the iPhone, shipped a few thousand phones to an Apple Store in Phoenix, and then didn't ship any more for months—and wouldn't explain why.

Last Friday, two Waymo employees participated in an "ask me anything" thread on the SelfDrivingCars subreddit, a watering hole for self-driving industry insiders. Questions about expansion plans dominated the conversation.

"How are you going to scale?" one redditor asked. "What are the impediments to service expansion at this time?"

The Waymonauts responded with maddening generalities.

"We feel the same urgency to scale quickly that others do, but a ton of work goes into doing it safely," wrote Waymo's Sam Kansara."  Read more  Hmmmm... Not at all surprising.  Can you imagine trying to be better than one's own Land Rover or Porsche in car country.  That is a heavy lift.  Making it heavier is the focus on today's most entitled yuppies. That's as bad as the original focus of driverless cars on 1%ers.  Waymos are pure and simple mobility machines to get you from/to places horizontally, just as elevators do vertically ... just get you up to the "8th floor".  Why are elevators so successful at what they do?... Second best is the stairwell! They win all the time, hands down.

In Chandler, the "stairwell" is your car parked in your garage.  You don't even have to go outside in all that heat.  Waymo's got to be really good to beat that!  Waymo might end up getting close to that good, but in the beginning chances "slim-to-none".  Not that the car in the garage doesn't have an enormous amount of "excess baggage".  Everyone seems to have conveniently forgotten about it.  When even with all of its LiDars, radars and deepLearning, whereas the car with the Mad Men fantasies is way more than half full and your go-to mobility is your car.  Your car allowed you to consider the Chandlers of this world as a place whee you want to live.  That's a challenging market place for Waymo.  It's worse than Bing v Google

A better place for Waymo  ( or Ford/Argo or GM/cruise) the place to start is to focus on a market where they can easily deliver better service.  The obvious market is to provide Waymo mobility to concentrations of households that have zero or only one car.  Folks that have been left behind by the automobile and don't have access to one.  Those that have been relegated to take the staircase thereby not even having the opportunity to reach "the eighth floor"; which, once they can using Waymo,  would substantially improve their lives. They might in fact appreciate Waymo right out of the box.

Manhattan is one such place, but it has a great subway and safely driving its roads is enormously challenging, so that's arguably the last place for Waymo to go.  However, the census identifies many communities and "inner suburbs" that have substantial densities of zero and one-car household.  For example: Trenton New Jersey. Waymo would be the obvious mobility choice.  Numerous Trenton residents  would readily perceive Waymo as the "Google" in their trip mode-choice.  

Another note... trying to sell Waymo technology on its ability to improve safety is a fool's gambit. Since Waymos don't misbehave, it is "easy" to make them safer, but that argument is hard to get across Misbehaviors are core to the fantasies of driving and are thus excused and forgotten about.  Alain

Alain L. Kornhauser, PhD
Professor & Director of Undergraduate Studies, Operations Research & Financial Engineering
Director, Transportation Program
Faculty Chair, Princeton Autonomous Vehicle Engineering
229 Sherrerd Hall
Princeton University
Princeton, NJ
[log in to unmask]
609-980-1427 (c
)
Princeton
                                                          Shield[log in to unmask]" class="" width="90" height="100" border="0">


***************************************************************************************************************
This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.

Unsubscribe | Re-subscribe