Comment on After 50 million miles, Waymos crash a lot less than human drivers
dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 1 week agoThat’s when vehicle to vehicle communication will come into play. When we can automate the driving and link the cars’ comm systems together, it becomes a network management problem.
Flisty@mstdn.social 1 week ago
@dogslayeggs this is not a good solution unless you're expecting to mandate that all pedestrians, cyclists, scooter riders, guide dogs, whatever, wear them too, and that all existing cars are retrofitted with them. Kind of dystopian.
dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I was clearly only talking about cars, not pedestrians. Driverless cars have already shown they are pretty good at avoiding pedestrians and cyclists and scooters and dogs. Even in the case of the pedestrian hit by the Cruise car, that pedestrian was hit by another car first and then thrown into the path of the Cruise. The one case of a dog hit by a car was a dog running out from behind parked cars with no time for a human to stop, let alone the Waymo… and dogs don’t usually wave and signal to drivers on the road.
As far as retrofitted cars, this is about improving the current system not requiring 100% compliance. Do you ban people from driving on the roads if they don’t wave at you on a one-car wide road? No. So you don’t have to ban cars that don’t have this tech. But when more and more cars DO have the tech, then you get improvements over time.
Flisty@mstdn.social 1 week ago
@dogslayeggs I know you were only talking about cars. My point is you can't only think about cars because there are too many other factors, including drivers of other cars who don't know whether or not they can go if the other "driver" doesn't indicate whether they've seen them or not. It's not about "banning people for not waving", it's that if someone doesn't let the other person through, nobody moves. The endpoint will be everyone hating Waymos and always going first.