Apple Autonomous Test Vehicle Involved in Accident on August 24

[dilbert99]

No.

The word that was used to describe the A P P L E . C A R was " P R E P A R I N G "

Once more:

Here is the Webster Definition of P R E P A R E
See?

Ok so in other words, the Apple car hesitated, slammed on the anchors down to 1mph and couldn't make up its mind whether to merge or not. Did something that humans rarely do and perhaps got rear ended. If that is the case then yes, person behind was at fault but I believe this is turning out to be one of the main ways that autonomous cars are crashing from being too hesitant which is actually an unsafe practice.

A lot of this crash is mostly hearsay with very little detail given away. The actual accident report didn't give the kind of details most of the public would give in their statements.

In any case, yes, less people would die if only/mostly/large number of autonomous cars were on the road.

PS learn not to shout at people, respect!

 

[RobertMartens]

since I went to driving school but you never stop when merging onto a highway (unless there’s a STOP sign) <1 mph would be considered a stop.

Thank god I live in MA where people know how to drive. Like they say on Big Brother, "Expect the unexpected". No problems.

I learned in drivers ed never to drive into the car in front of you, no matter the speed.
[doublepost=1535875553][/doublepost]

Either all vehicles are equipped and using autonomous technology or none are.

You propose an impossible solution.

 

[grad]

Apple is also working on a self-driving shuttle service called "PAIL," an acronym for "Palo Alto to Infinite Loop."

How about "FAIL" ?

 

[RobertMartens]

If the car industry proposed a way to save 20,000 lives and billions in damages every year, would you even listen to the proposal?

 

[scartart]

Leaf hits car.

Happens every autumn (fall). A few weeks early though.

 

[RobertMartens]

Well, at least it’s following the autonomous vehicle trend of crashing...

Well I actually think the whole things one dumb stupid idea!

How many deaths total so far? 2? 3? 4?
[doublepost=1535876482][/doublepost]

Am I reading wrong or wasn't Apple car got REAR ENDED? So the fault is at Leaf no?

Are you doing that on purpose?

 

[Piggie]

if I reverse into your car, at say 5 mph just enough to do damage.

Then I pull forward, screaming it's your fault, and take photo's of the damage YOU did to my car and there are no witnesses.

Who gets the blame?

 

[Bacillus]

With all those mammoth cameras tossed on the roof, it can’t be ruled out that the AppleCar failed to accelerate (1 mph??)

 

[apolloa]

How many deaths total so far? 2? 3? 4?
[doublepost=1535876482][/doublepost]


Are you doing that on purpose?

How many autonomous vehicles being tested on the public roads at any one time? 4? 6? 10?

 

[gwaizai]

Where is the Microsoft car?

Yeah where? The Apple car vs Microsoft car in a head to head demolition derby ala RoboCup.

With Tim and Bill riding shotgun.

 

[Piggie]

I still can't see Apple making a car. They know they will be putting their neck on the line to do that.
Making systems to sell to others, well that's also risky as the car won't get the blame for a death, the computer/software will as that's controlling the car.

Its a very exciting space right now and everyone wants to be there and not left out, but I can see so many legal issues to come when deaths start happening.We'll need the whole legal system, top to bottom, and the public in general to understand and accept deaths will just happen, and accept that whilst this is sad, it's safer than humans driving.

Still hard to explain this to the mother with her 8 year old daughter, organs splattered down the road, after the Apple car hit and ran over her.

The media will go ape over such an event, it will happen, question is, how will we deal with it.

If you were born into a world where this was the norm, then you would accept it as a price worth paying.

Like say none of us had cars, and someone told you, cars could be sold to the public, but perhaps 1000 people a day will die due to this, you'd probably say no. it's too high a price, but as thats the world we grew up in, we just accept it as the norm.

Society will accept this in time,but the transition to have that acceptance is going to be hard Im sure

 

[_Refurbished_]

That will never happen in the U.S. thankfully, I love driving as a hobby. Maybe I'll head the National Driver's Association and start lobbying

Can you buy a tube TV from Best Buy? Nope. One day you won’t be able to buy a car that you drive. It’s inevitable that the market will shift to autonomy and with that, our culture will shift dramatically pertaining to the acceptance and safety of autonomous vehicles. Once autonomous driving is proven to be dramatically safer than manual driving, manual driving will have a large red target on its back for lawmakers.

People that cherish driving will be the “get off my lawn” crowd. While there will be some sort of grandfathering that will allow manual driving, the government will set an end date making manual driving illegal.

Manual driving it is one of the biggest killers in our country. Its days are numbered.

 

[apolloa]

Can you buy a tube TV from Best Buy? Nope. One day you won’t be able to buy a car that you drive. It’s inevitable that the market will shift to autonomy and with that, our culture will shift dramatically pertaining to the acceptance and safety of autonomous vehicles. Once autonomous driving is proven to be dramatically safer than manual driving, manual driving will have a large red target on its back for lawmakers.

People that cherish driving will be the “get off my lawn” crowd. While there will be some sort of grandfathering that will allow manual driving, the government will set an end date making manual driving illegal.

Manual driving it is one of the biggest killers in our country. Its days are numbered.

ONLY if the public buy self driving cars. The manufactures can pump out whatever they like, but if the public don’t like it they won’t buy it and the industry will have wasted billions. And I think this will be exactly what happens.

Because they are telling humans to trust machines to drive them around, which if the machine makes a mistake will kill them... or if to save them their robot car drives over a child or dog on the pavement.. and they will have to live with that for the rest of their lives.

 

[truthertech]

With all the sensors merging should be a piece of cake vs stopping on the expressway like what a bad or inexperienced driver would do. Also, doesn't it have collision avoidance like Tesla to avoid those situations?

LOL. It was hit from behind. You have to read beyond the headline. LOL

 

[BruceEBonus]

Be careful. This ominous habit of sudden braking by our robotic chums might be their sinister way of gaining money to fund their electronic twerpery with ‘cash for crash’ accidents. So. Be wary if you ever see any of these artificially intelligent beings in front of you - you jolly well give them 50 yards of leeway in case they get up to their futuristic tricks again and blame you for running into the back of them. Again. Have no truck (sic) with it. You now know what to do. If any car with a massive roof rack full of cameras that’s nearly as big as the car vehicle itself should slam on its brakes. Get out of your car. Bang on the window and shout “Hey HAL! Get out of that car now, you robotic runt and explain yourself or I’m calling Cyberdyne Industries and having you deactivated!”

NOTE: a word of advice however, do ensure it is a self driving car first and not just a poorly driven one owned by a professional photographer who may very well have a roof rack full of cameras. Safe driving, readers!

UPDATE: I’ve just been informed these autonomous automotives can actually have humans travelling in them as well? That can’t be right can it? It can? Oh dear.
Quickly. I’ll keep the pesky C3-PO driver distracted while you escape out of the passenger door!

 

[Piggie]

ONLY if the public buy self driving cars. The manufactures can pump out whatever they like, but if the public don’t like it they won’t buy it and the industry will have wasted billions. And I think this will be exactly what happens.

Because they are telling humans to trust machines to drive them around, which if the machine makes a mistake will kill them... or if to save them their robot car drives over a child or dog on the pavement.. and they will have to live with that for the rest of their lives.

Why pay out $20,000, $30,000 etc of your hard earned money to buy a car, then have to pay to fuel it, have to pay insurance and any other tax's.
Also pay for items such as tyres, brakes that wear out, but also repairs for other aspects.

All that expense, when you can just use you phone app to summon a driverless car of your choosing to your door in minutes.

I'm 100% certain in year to come it will be seen as crazy to spend all that money, the second biggest purchase in most people's lives on this expensive device to sit outside your home or at your office car park for 98% of the 24 hour day, when you can use one of the Massive nationwide fleets of tens of thousands of driverless cars just waiting for you to summon one.

 

[fairuz]

Be careful. This ominous habit of sudden braking by our robotic chums might be their sinister way of gaining money to fund their electronic twerpery with ‘cash for crash’ accidents.

You're thinking of people driving. If someone hits your car, they pay only enough for you to fix it, unless a human is also injured. Only if the human is injured there can be all sorts of BS charges.
[doublepost=1535906673][/doublepost]

No you aren't. Blanket statements like that are ridiculous and unhelpful. The world is not black and white.
Consider, you are driving along in two lane traffic. The person to the side of you pulls in front of you without warning. Your safe braking distance has now been cut to a third. Until such time as you get back your safe distance should you be at fault for rear ending them?

Should not be at fault, but it probably is as far as the insurance companies are concerned. They'll make this assumption unless you have dashcam evidence or something.

 

[sidewinder3000]

With all the sensors merging should be a piece of cake vs stopping on the expressway like what a bad or inexperienced driver would do. Also, doesn't it have collision avoidance like Tesla to avoid those situations?

What the hell are you talking about?

First of all, this is a test vehicle that is highly secretive, so who knows what capabilities it has or doesn’t have?

Secondly, the Apple vehicle was rear-ended from behind. I am not aware of any vehicles that are programmed to lurch forward in the event of a potential rear end collision. I suppose it is possible, but that would be problematic and it’s own way, for various reasons, as the path ahead would need to be 100% clear.

If that anti-getting-rear-ended feature does exist, why wouldn’t you link to a video of that? Instead, you linked to a video showing Teslas avoiding front end collisions because...?

 

[apolloa]

Why pay out $20,000, $30,000 etc of your hard earned money to buy a car, then have to pay to fuel it, have to pay insurance and any other tax's.
Also pay for items such as tyres, brakes that wear out, but also repairs for other aspects.

All that expense, when you can just use you phone app to summon a driverless car of your choosing to your door in minutes.

I'm 100% certain in year to come it will be seen as crazy to spend all that money, the second biggest purchase in most people's lives on this expensive device to sit outside your home or at your office car park for 98% of the 24 hour day, when you can use one of the Massive nationwide fleets of tens of thousands of driverless cars just waiting for you to summon one.

Because YOU DRIVE IT!! What a ridiculous argument, you can do that know, it’s called a Taxi.. and it has a human driving it. Not some sort of dystopian future pulled straight from a SciFi film.
This self driving obsession will fail, in fantastic style.

 

[stars_fan]

Sounds like Apple figured out how to stop the unintended acceleration in those toyotas

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

I have a Level 2 Driving Assistance on my 2018 Audi S5 and it works pretty well but I wouldn't trust it 100%. It saves you a lot of strain, specially in stop and go traffic but the world is not ready for Self Driving cars yet.
In my opinion, the only way for this to work is for ALL cars to be autonomous and to communicate with each other.
There are too many bad drivers out there and the systems are not quick enough to avoid crashes, I know, I use the system every day and u need to stay alert ALL the time.

Once you get an update in your Tesla, holy crap. You have a list of "Well, it's okay, but it won't be ready until it does x, y, and z." 2-4 weeks later, the update arrives and it does X, Y, and Z, and you have to dig a bit deeper for your U and V that it still doesn't do.

At the rate it keeps getting better, I'll be surprised if they're not ready to drive entirely without a person in them by 2020.

I find it interesting that people mention the driving assistance available for sale in non-Teslas as if it's relevant. Every other company is still stuck on the idea that cars are at their best on the day you buy them - Tesla is the only one that relentlessly improves their product even after its in their customer's hands. I didn't just buy the car for what it did when I bought it - I bought it for what it does now, and for what it'll do in a few months.

 

[ikramerica]

Hesitation when pulling into traffic seams to be a major problem with many of the driverless vehicles. Google, Apple, Uber.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Autonomous vehicles —- taking the fun out of driving..

This is why at some point self driving cars will have to be mandated because without a mandate you'll still have a very large group of people that will still want to manually drive their car. Basically a vehicle that is not self driving cannot be operated on a roadway with self driving vehicles. Humans are just too unpredictable for the self driving cars to deal with in all situations. The one big cost saving will be owners will probably only need comprehensive insurance for things like hail or other acts of God. If these vehicles are involved in a collision it will be the responsibility of the manufacturer not the driver. That will help a lot on insurance costs. Of course I would expect some of the additional costs of manufacturer liability to be passed on in the purchase price, but that's how business works.

I would think laws will also have to be passed that will make modifications to self driving cars illegal as well. Where I live people are always modifying their automobiles, whether its new fancy rims, lower suspension, lift kits on trucks, etc. If people start messing with the components of these autonomous vehicles who knows what the outcome will be. Once these vehicles become common place we will need a whole new set of laws to deal with them.

 

[apolloa]

Once you get an update in your Tesla, holy crap. You have a list of "Well, it's okay, but it won't be ready until it does x, y, and z." 2-4 weeks later, the update arrives and it does X, Y, and Z, and you have to dig a bit deeper for your U and V that it still doesn't do.

At the rate it keeps getting better, I'll be surprised if they're not ready to drive entirely without a person in them by 2020.

I find it interesting that people mention the driving assistance available for sale in non-Teslas as if it's relevant. Every other company is still stuck on the idea that cars are at their best on the day you buy them - Tesla is the only one that relentlessly improves their product even after its in their customer's hands. I didn't just buy the car for what it did when I bought it - I bought it for what it does now, and for what it'll do in a few months.

Tesla though is in serious financial trouble.. and has a CEO who likes to mouth off on Twitter. Be interesting to see if they are still around in 3 years.
[doublepost=1535921386][/doublepost]

This is why at some point self driving cars will have to be mandated because without a mandate you'll still have a very large group of people that will still want to manually drive their car. Basically a vehicle that is not self driving cannot be operated on a roadway with self driving vehicles. Humans are just too unpredictable for the self driving cars to deal with in all situations. The one big cost saving will be owners will probably only need comprehensive insurance for things like hail or other acts of God. If these vehicles are involved in a collision it will be the responsibility of the manufacturer not the driver. That will help a lot on insurance costs. Of course I would expect some of the additional costs of manufacturer liability to be passed on in the purchase price, but that's how business works.

I would think laws will also have to be passed that will make modifications to self driving cars illegal as well. Where I live people are always modifying their automobiles, whether its new fancy rims, lower suspension, lift kits on trucks, etc. If people start messing with the components of these autonomous vehicles who knows what the outcome will be. Once these vehicles become common place we will need a whole new set of laws to deal with them.

That won’t work, those modifications you talk about keep rather a lot of people in jobs, and drive a big global market, the idea that governments around the globe will simply kill of that market is rather extremist. Just for self driving cars. It would only serve to drive a massive negativity towards them.

 

[kemal]

Did the Apple software jump out and yell at the Nissan software?