297
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Safe Streets Rebel's protest comes after automatic vehicles were blamed for incidents including crashing into a bus and running over a dog. City officials in June said...

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] moss@lemmy.world 65 points 1 year ago

I live in the area and the streets are just clogged with these fucking autonomous cars. Traffic is slower, people end up having to swerve, it's just a constant persistent headache. If I had it my way, they'd all be off the streets and into the crusher

[-] dustojnikhummer@lemmy.world 91 points 1 year ago

Almost like public transit is better than self driving taxis

[-] howrar@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 year ago

Can we instead have self driving buses?

I'm envisioning a system where you tell it your location and where you want to go, then it automatically sets up a route for the bus that coincides with where most people want to go and tells you to get off when it's near your destination. This can work in conjunction with self driving taxis if no one else is going to your destination.

[-] Kuinox@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Maybe minibus but in no way it will works with full sized bus.
The ideal bus to commute is a bus line with frequent bus, you don't have to check the time, just show up and in a few minutes there is a bus.

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] SCB@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Public transit is better, but self-driving taxis are absolutely coming to every city in this country, which is great if you live in a city like mine that has little to no public transport infrastructure.

Also, automated taxis can service more rural areas, which is the key driver of lack of public transport in many "commuter cities."

Luddites gonna Luddite, but this tech is coming, and it's coming to logistics and taxis first.

[-] dustojnikhummer@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, but SanFran ain't one of those. Taxis have the same problem cars do, which is size.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DrM@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago

I was in SF 4 years ago and it was insane how many self-driving cars were on the streets for tests. Especially on Lombard Street they just drove in circles. I can't imagine how annoying this is for someone who lives there

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works 58 points 1 year ago

Thousands of accidents a year from human drivers. I sleep

90 accidents a year from autonomous vehicles. Lazer eyes

[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

DARPA figures out how to safely drive cars using LIDAR. Musk asked for a self driving car. Engineers come back the LIDAR solution. Musk fires them, says if humans can drive with two eyes, then so can computers. Cameras are cheaper than LIDAR. Second group tries it with cameras, can't get it to work, asked why they can't use LIDAR. Second group of engineers is fired. Third group comes up with something that 'kind of works'. People die. Big companies avoid self driving altogether, even though we have a perfect solution with LIDAR, all because Musk wanted to save a buck and can't get out of the way of his engineers.

[-] Yendor@reddthat.com 13 points 1 year ago

I’ve worked on serious projects involving LiDAR. The LiDAR you need at these speeds and with this resolution cost almost as much as an Electric Car - it’s too expensive to reach wide adoption. But video processing with CNNs/RNNs has proven you can build the same level of data with cameras. You don’t even need binocular cameras now - if objects are moving you can generate binocular data by combining IMU data with time-series imagery.

As I understand it, Tesla’s delays aren’t related to image capture (which is where LiDAR could help). They’re related to trying to find universal actions to take against an almost infinite number of possible scenarios (mostly actions by human drivers).

[-] over_clox@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago

You make it sound like it's a 50/50 split between human drivers and autonomous vehicles, which is definitely not the case.

There are way more human drivers than autonomous vehicles. So, when an autonomous vehicle runs your child or pet over or whatever, who do you blame? The company? The programmers? The DMV for even allowing them on the road in the first place?

What's an autonomous vehicle do if it gets a flat? Park in the middle of the interstate like an idiot instead of pulling over and phone home for a mechanic?

[-] donalonzo@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You need to first ask yourself if it more important to put blame than to minimize risk.

"Autonomous vehicles could potentially reduce traffic fatalities by up to 90%."

"Autonomous vehicle accidents have been recorded at a slightly lower rate compared with conventional cars, at 4.7 accidents per million miles driven."

https://blog.gitnux.com/driverless-car-accident-statistics/

[-] HedonismB0t@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago

That opinion puts a lot of blind faith in the companies developing self driving and their infinitely altruistic motives.

[-] IntoDaLagoon@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago

What do you mean, I'm sure the industry whose standard practices include having the self-driving function turn itself off nanoseconds before a crash to avoid liability is totally motivated to spend the time and money it would take to fix the problem. After all, we live in a time of such advanced AI that all the news sites and magazines tell me we're on the verge of the Singularity, and they've never misled me before.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] biddy@feddit.nl 7 points 1 year ago

That wasn't an opinion, it's a statistic.

No (large public) company ever has altruistic motives. They aren't inherently good or bad, just machines driven by profit.

load more comments (21 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jtmetcalfe@lemmy.fmhy.ml 34 points 1 year ago

Using the public as Guinea pigs for corporate profits: priceless

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] pickle_party247@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

the real funny here is how the USA has the most lax driving test standards in the developed world resulting in crazy amounts of road traffic accidents and really high mortality rates, but instead of dealing with shitty driving at the source there's a billion dollar industry in autonomous driving.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

When a for profit company is deciding how much time/energy/funds they want to invest in pedestrian safety, you get LOUD and you stay that way forever.

Your comment is blind to the reality we live in and the broken, out of touch people deciding if human lives are a businesses priority, and at what percentages, as these types of vehicles scale.

When humans get in an accident, there were choices/mistakes made, but there are things we can understand in certain situations and find closure often. When elon's failed experiment decapitates your grandmother by driving her under a semi and sheering off the top off the car, you'll probably never settle with that image as long as you live - and you'll see elon in the news each day being a tool and never seeing justice for that moment.

There's a difference with distinction in this conversation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] lobut@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago

I mean, there's probably millions of drivers performing more driving and less than that of autonomous vehicles.

I personally can't wait for autonomous vehicles to take over but the argument would be clearer with percentages and stuff.

[-] Sethayy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago

Did you read the article? The protests are in favour of affordable public transit, instead of using 'surveillance pods' as a way to build even MORE roads. The accidents are probably the least of their concerns, although still on the list

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] Chipthemonk@lemmy.fmhy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

The interviewed protesters sound a little whacky. Maybe the cars are doing surveillance with the police, but that idea seems far fetched and unrealistic. Maybe I’m wrong.

I agree with more public transportation, bikes, and so forth, but I also agree with self driving cars. I dream of a future in which all cars are driven automatically without human drivers. Humans are very fallible and we all know, in almost every city, how many shitty drivers there are. Autonomous vehicles could fix this.

[-] firadin@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

Maybe the cars are doing surveillance with the police, but that idea seems far fetched and unrealistic

I'm sure that's what people said about Ring, or Facebook messages being used to arrest women for abortions. Why would a company turn down an extra revenue stream (or subpoena)?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] krolden@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 year ago

Companies like this will sell their data to anyone willing to pay.

[-] FluffyPotato@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Cars are incredibly inefficient at transporting people though, like you need a massive highway to transport the amount of people a train can transport, not to mention how much higher maintenance roads are compared to train tracks.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] craftyindividual@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

It look like a unicorn

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
297 points (96.3% liked)

Technology

59038 readers
4107 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS