Ah well, I'm nobody anyway, just a guy hungry to see tech companies compete and see less of tech being monopolized between a few companies.
"Driver error or pedal misapplication was found responsible for most of the incidents.[28] The report ended stating, "Our conclusion is Toyota's problems were mechanical, not electrical." This included sticking accelerator pedals, and pedals caught under floor mats."
And Malcolm Gladwell's podcast about the subject, http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/08-blame-game
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-fi-toyota-prius-i...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Barr_(software_enginee...
T-SB-0172-09
I love the concept of electrical cars but that has to come with a leap forward in software quality and electrical engineering quality, which I am not really seeing happen.
The idea of Quality is still, basically, alien in the software field. Some of that can be blamed on 'the marketplace' but then again, I believe that if people are going to call themselves "Engineers" they should take up that old mantle of the public responsibility inherent in that title, as it was developed after much blood and horror was spilled over the failed bridges and railroads of the 19th century.
This is especially true for high technology projects, and only becoming more of a risk as technology becomes more complex.
Can totally see it happening with something like self-driving cars, which is currently still a black art (remember how even Uber apparently needed to filch some IP from Waymo to even get its own project going?)
Any proof? I see a settlement but not an admission or proof of guilt by Uber (not saying the former Google employee wasn't dirty). https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/9/16995254/waymo-uber-lawsui...
http://www.safetyresearch.net/blog/articles/tipping-point
Edit: I see this is addressed in updates to the Revisionist History posting, in PDF form.
It appears that autonomous vehicle progress has an interesting moat where being good at it (the ability to drive a lot of miles) allows you to get better faster (drive more miles, more quickly). It is similar to a network effect, but with competency rather than number of connections.
Does anyone have a name for this type of advantage, or know of examples in other areas?
This doesn't seem to be the case. Look at the California disengagement statistics over cumulative miles - it looks like it's logarithmic or something, certainly not accelerating. Or look at Waymo in Arizona: they are driving, what, 70,000 miles per month and have racked up cumulative millions there already; if there really were some sort of compound interest or exponential improvement, then after they solved it well enough to go live and started racking up all those miles, self-driving cars should be on the verge of being solved & going global unless you postulate an enormous distance in between 'good enough to drive customers around Arizona' and 'good enough to drive customers around everywhere'.
To summarize what happened - Uber's autopilot makes decisions about when emergency braking is necessary. But the software was braking so often on public roads that overall it's driving was erratic.
So Uber knowingly disabled emergency braking in all cases.
This essentially turned the car into a missile on our public roads.
at the time of the accident, the autopilot detected the pedestrian. Calculated an imminent collision, and initiated emergency braking. Instead of actually breaking, the message to break simply went to the logs.
Combine that with a safety driver that was looking down at the console and not up at the road - and the fatality was the result.
--
It is completely beyond me why there isn't a battery of government saftey tests that vehicles with autopilot must pass before they get approved for use on our public roads.
How many times have you seen footage of a crash test dummy safely landing in an air bag? I want to see footage of crash test dummies getting pushed out in front of autopilot cars - and hopefully, never getting run down.
Because the inefficiencies of government are catching up with them as they'd rather right each other (different parties) rather than be productive and move the country forward.
You misspelled lobbing.
You misspelled lobbying.
My only guess would be Toyota is hoping that when Uber goes full self-driving they would use Toyota vehicles to do it.
A large investment in a potentially very large future customer.
Would Boeing invest money in an autonomous flight project by Southwest Airlines in hopes of locking in a Boeing 737 only fleet?
Now why it was disabled is another question. Most likely because their system isn't anywhere near ready.
The only value I see from the whole of Uber is know how and practical examples of how not do solve this. The fatality didn't change anything, it is (and was) painfully apparent that it was only a matter of time.
Oh yeah, and Uber released a super contrasty picture to justify their car's behavior. Less biased sources showed that there was plenty of visibility on that stretch of road.
If you're looking for sources, Ars covered everything in pretty good detail.
If Uber's thesis - that app-hailing will supplant car ownership - is correct, then car manufacturers have an incentive to either create their own hailing networks or partner with existing ones.