Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Waymo Scraps Plans For Human Intervention In Dangerous Situations

      Experiments showed people were too distracted to perform this task

    A number of companies that are working on autonomous driving systems are implementing features that require a driver to take control in hairy situations. But Waymo, the self-driving unit of Alphabet (Google's parent company) recently revealed they have stopped developing these features. The reason is simple, drivers lacked the awareness to take over driving.

    Waymo's CEO John Krafcik told reporters yesterday the decision to scrap this technology comes down to experiments done back in 2013 with Google employees that were filmed. The videos shown for the first time outside of Google showed people messing on their phones, putting on makeup, and even someone deciding to take a nap.

    “What we found was pretty scary. It’s hard to take over because they have lost contextual awareness,” said Krafcik.

    After the napping incident, plans for a driver to intervene were scrapped. Since then, Waymo has been working on technologies that didn't require human interaction. As such, Waymo's Chrysler Pacificas running in Phoenix, AZ only have two 'drive' buttons: one to start a drive and the other to tell the vehicle to pull over at its earliest convenience.

    Source: Reuters

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    We'll this is a no brainer, how can one expect a person to take over control of an auto when they have not been paying attention the whole time to what is going on around them. Common sense or a lack of one at Waymo. Crazy Alphabet / Google Peeps.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 hours ago, dfelt said:

    We'll this is a no brainer, how can one expect a person to take over control of an auto when they have not been paying attention the whole time to what is going on around them. Common sense or a lack of one at Waymo. Crazy Alphabet / Google Peeps.

    They were not crazy.  They simply followed the data and observations.  Besides this happened four years ago.  I am sure that human intervention was never going to be implemented once self-driving took over.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 10/31/2017 at 8:46 AM, dfelt said:

    We'll this is a no brainer, how can one expect a person to take over control of an auto when they have not been paying attention the whole time to what is going on around them. Common sense or a lack of one at Waymo. Crazy Alphabet / Google Peeps.

    this was common sense... Waymo's engineers very likely knew how it'd turn out this way, but then they wouldn't have the data needed to counter concern-trolling luddites who'd insist that the machines are out to kill us

    • Haha 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ...lost contextual awareness.

    The (theoretical) transition between driver-controlled & true AD cars is going to be an entertaining/madly dangerous time once those who become 'programmed' to nap get back behind the wheel of a non-AD car. That's going to be, like, a 20 year window, too.

    Edited by balthazar
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, FAPTurbo said:

    this was common sense... Waymo's engineers very likely knew how it'd turn out this way, but then they wouldn't have the data needed to counter concern-trolling luddites who'd insist that the machines are out to kill us

    You sure you wanna open that Pandora's box, tho?

    7c28347d51cfa4eb61d160010b2e7d9f.jpg

    Greek mythology...

    yes...

    myths...

    Not to be taken so bloody literal...there is a message to be learned in these Greek myths...

    Read the lyrics in this song...

    released in 1969...

    all that in the song is happening now...the songwriter did not have to wait THAT long for all THAT to happen...just a mere 45 years...

     

    Just a thought...

    Edited by oldshurst442
    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I wonder if the future is going to be a mix of Blade Runner (robots built to do the crappy work, no flying cars though), The Terminator (computers taking over and killing humans), and post-apocalyptic stuff like The Road....but seriously, being in software, I see how buggy and insecure software systems are on a daily basis, I certainly would't trust them to control the complete driving of cars, heavy trucks, etc any time soon...

    I recently read After On, a fun read about Silicon Valley startup companies, social networking, AI and terrorism... 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    14 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    I wonder if the future is going to be a mix of Blade Runner (robots built to do the crappy work, no flying cars though), The Terminator (computers taking over and killing humans), and post-apocalyptic stuff like The Road....but seriously, being in software, I see how buggy and insecure software systems are on a daily basis, I certainly would't trust them to control the complete driving of cars, heavy trucks, etc any time soon...

    I recently read After On, a fun read about Silicon Valley startup companies, social networking, AI and terrorism... 

    Too late, Saudia Arabia already gave citizenship to the first AI human.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-the-first-robot-citizen-sophia-animatronic-humanoid-2017-10

    Interesting reading and will scare many who fear AI.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    19 hours ago, balthazar said:

     

     

    The (theoretical) transition between driver-controlled & true AD cars is going to be an entertaining/madly dangerous time once those who become 'programmed' to nap get back behind the wheel of a non-AD car. That's going to be, like, a 20 year window, too.

    It's scary when Albert goes from the Buick to the Honda and backs up without the rear-view camera and no parking sensors...... 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • How did their engineers find a way to offer both with great space? It is a large 'engine bay'.  At this point, even if I said that 2 cu.ft is nonexistent, if the Audi could offer a frunk that size, Cadillac should have done the same.  I have realized that  people associate EVs with frunks and this is why you and I (and I think @David too) might criticize Cadillac for a missed opportunity with the Lyric.    Forget about Silverados and Hummers, they gave the mid-engine Corvette a trunk and frunk when a mid-engined supercar, even as a Corvette, could have forgone a frunk, but they KNEW it would benefit Corvette because people EXPECT storage space in a Corvette.    GM missed the part that people ALSO expect frunks in EVs...  ESPECIALLY in the market that the Lyriq resides in.  yeah......that would be the proper wording. Its not a big deal by ANY means.  Just disappointing. 
    • Thanks for the information. The Model X seems to have an abundance of space, everywhere.  The Lyriq just seems to have such a large "engine bay" that could/should still be able to have at least 2 cubic feet of space available. It isn't like their rear cargo space is THAT much larger than what they chose to compare it to.  It's a perfectly fine vehicle and the lack of a small frunk wouldn't stop me, it's just a little disappointing it doesn't have one when I feel like they could have engineered one in and still had a large boot. 
    • At 2.12 and 0.95 cu.ft for the Audi and Jag's frunk respectfully is a non-issue for the Lyriq not having a frunk. Maximizing the back trunk space as what the GM guys are saying for the Lyriq and the reason why they did it that way by-passing the need for a frunk sounds like marketing BS, until you realize that Audi and Jag's frunk space is nonexistent...   To which GM's words then kinda make sense as the Lyriq does in fact offer more room back there.   Frunk space is kinda expected though, for EVs, so there is that... Tesla Model X for a comparison as Tesla is the benchmark....   https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modelx/en_us/GUID-91E5877F-3CD2-4B3B-B2B8-B5DB4A6C0A05.html     Cargo Volume Table 1. 5-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row folded flat 2,410 85.1 Behind second row 1,050 37.1 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,593 91.6 Maximum total cargo volume with 5 passengers 1,233 43.5 Table 2. 6-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row in max cargo position, third row folded flat 2,431 85.8 Behind second row, third row folded flat 935 33 Behind third row 425 15 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,614 92.3 Maximum total cargo volume with 6 passengers 608 21.5 Table 3. 7-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row folded flat 2,314 81.7 Behind second row, third row folded flat 957 33.8 Behind third row 425 15 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,497 88.2 Maximum total cargo volume with 7 passengers 608 21.5       The Lyriq's cargo space is plentiful and it would seem like an engineering choice to favour rear space over the use of a frunk.  Is it a sound engineering choice? Possibly yes as the powertrain bits need not be crammed.   Is it a sound MARKETING choice? Time will tell as many folk really dont understand engineering choices all to well...   Nor do they seem to care.  If they want a frunk, they WANT a phoquing frunk... 
    • Lyriq Chief Engineer, Jamie Brewer, recently explained to GM Authority that the team decided to prioritize rear cargo space over two separate cargo areas. Thus, the 2023 Cadillac Lyriq will have a larger traditional rear storage area. In fact, according to Brewer, that enables the Lyriq to boast the “largest cargo volume in its competitive set.” That made us wonder what, exactly, is the Lyriq’s competitive set. According to Cadillac spokesperson, Katie Minter, it consists of the Audi e-tron and Jaguar I-Pace. “Lyriq is aimed at customers that are looking for a luxury SUV with outstanding styling, ride and handling and seamlessly integrated technology. In this instance, we’re looking at vehicles such as the Audi e-tron and Jaguar I-Pace,” Minter told GM Authority in an emailed statement. So then, Lyriq has a maximum cargo volume of 60.8 cubic feet behind the first row seats and 28.0 cubic feet behind the second row. When compared to the Audi e-tron and the Jaguar I-Pace, the Lyriq does offer more space in the back. 2023 Cadillac Lyriq Cargo vs. e-tron I-Pace   Cadillac Lyriq Audi e-tron Jaguar I-Pace Rear cargo volume behind second row (cu. ft.) 28.0 28.5 25.3 Rear cargo volume behind first row (cu. ft.) 60.8 56.5 51.0 Frunk cargo volume (cu. ft.) N/A 2.12 0.95 Total front & rear cargo volume (cu. ft.)* 28.0 30.62 26.25 * With second row seats upright However, both the e-tron and the I-Pace feature frunks (2.12 cubic feet in the e-tron, 0.95 cubic feet in the I-Pace respectively), allowing the e-tron to have slightly more total cargo volume (combined frunk and rear cargo area). https://gmauthority.com/blog/2021/05/heres-why-the-2023-cadillac-lyriq-doesnt-have-a-frunk/  
    • That's probably a better worded way to put it. It's a missed opportunity.  They're all liquid cooled at this point and I can't imagine Ford and Tesla are having battery cooling issues, at least I haven't heard of any yet and I've watched a fair amount on the Mach-E and know somebody with a pair of Teslas in Nevada.  I don't believe lack of cooling has ever been a factor in an EV catching fire. It's always something shorting and sparking with poor connection(s) somewhere.  I'd also like to learn why. They have to have a good justification, I know they're not a bunch of idiots who "didn't think of it".  I just don't want the press release answer of "we needed the space for packaging". 
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. bobo
      bobo
      (54 years old)
    2. loki
      loki
      (39 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We  Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...