News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California. Parent comment

Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by unfamiliar on Friday June 26, 2015 @06:16AM (#9783328)
I think they were more implying that the software that makes the decisions should be common to all of them. That way we don't allow individual car manufacturers to make potentially fatal mistakes when cutting corners with their software development. I think at the very least there should be a standardisation, so that there can be some communication between cars to aid in resolving traffic jams and other uses.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by coldtea on Friday June 26, 2015 @06:35AM (#9783403)
>That way we don't allow individual car manufacturers to make potentially fatal mistakes when cutting corners with their software development.

Wouldn't all the cars by any manufacturer have to pass the same very rigorous driving tests in the first place, to be able to be sold in the market?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by unfamiliar on Friday June 26, 2015 @03:21PM (#9787116)
Then you will have people writing software with the aim of pass the tests, not real world safety. I don't think auto testing can catch the type of bugs that can arise sporadically, which could be fatal in the case of self driving cars.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by Crito on Friday June 26, 2015 @06:45AM (#9783440)
The industry isn't going to just hand Google a monopoly. Of course they are going to develop their own as well.

Even if Google's software was the absolute bees knees, what if Google deprioritized it? Left the industry? Made unreasonable licensing demands, or made exclusivity deals with competitor automotive manufactures? What if they used it as leverage to push manufactures around?

Even if you do decide to work with Google for now, not having a backup plan is just poor strategic planning. Having a backup plan means developing these sort of systems yourself.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Two self-driving cars involved in 'near miss' in California by unfamiliar on Friday June 26, 2015 @03:23PM (#9787128)
All I'm saying is that I trust Google to produce this software to a high standard, much much more than I trust the auto manufacturers to do so. I'm sure Google isn't developing their own brake pads in these cars, and I wouldn't trust those brake pads if they were.
[ Parent | on HN ]