Coronavirus shows Autonomous Vehicles Industry’s Hypocrisy, Recklessness, Lack of Courage, Ethics, Morality, Sincerity and Competence

Now we see many driverless vehicle makers are suspending their real-world testing efforts. Whether those are using in vehicle or remote safety drivers or assistance.


What a bunch of disingenuous hype.

This shows the acute hypocrisy, recklessness, cowardice, ethical and moral fortitude and competence of this industry.

First of all, many of these companies had to be forced to stop the practice by some level of government closing businesses. Which means they had no issue putting their drivers and the public at risk BOTH due to a disease and the reckless and needless process of “safety driving”. (Of course some are continuing with single safety drivers because they can.)

Back to the safety driving. If these folks were actually trying to do the right thing they would not be using a process which can never create anything close to a legitimate autonomous vehicle, will never save the lives they say they want to save and cannot be made safe in handover events in time critical scenarios.

Genuine leadership would have done or be doing two things. Cancelled all non-social interactions one their own prior to having to be told to do so. And use proper simulation to replace most of that public shadow and safety driving through the use of a legitimate real-world digital twin. Something that DoD simulation technology can do. And gaming-based simulation technology cannot.

More details here

An HD Map to Avoid the Crash of the Autonomous Vehicle Industry


Proposal for Successfully Creating an Autonomous Ground or Air Vehicle


Simulation can create a Complete Digital Twin of the Real World if DoD/Aerospace Technology is used

Autonomous Vehicles Need to Have Accidents to Develop this Technology

Using the Real World is better than Proper Simulation for AV Development — NONSENSE

Why are Autonomous Vehicle makers using Deep Learning over Dynamic Sense and Avoid with Dynamic Collision Avoidance? Seems very inefficient and needlessly dangerous?


The Hype of Geofencing for Autonomous Vehicles

My name is Michael DeKort — I am a former system engineer, engineering and program manager for Lockheed Martin. I worked in aircraft simulation, the software engineering manager for all of NORAD, the Aegis Weapon System, and on C4ISR for DHS.

Key Industry Participation

- Lead — SAE On-Road Autonomous Driving SAE Model and Simulation Task

- Member SAE ORAD Verification and Validation Task Force

- Member DIN/SAE International Alliance for Mobility Testing & Standardization (IAMTS) Sensor Simulation Specs

- Stakeholder for UL4600 — Creating AV Safety Guidelines

- Member of the IEEE Artificial Intelligence & Autonomous Systems Policy Committee (AI&ASPC)

- Presented the IEEE Barus Ethics Award for Post 9/11 Efforts

My company is Dactle

We are building an aerospace/DoD/FAA level D, full L4/5 simulation-based testing and AI system with an end-state scenario matrix to address several of the critical issues in the AV/OEM industry I mentioned in my articles below. This includes replacing 99.9% of public shadow and safety driving. As well as dealing with significant real-time, model fidelity and loading/scaling issues caused by using gaming engines and other architectures. (Issues Unity will confirm. We are now working together. We are also working with UAV companies). If not remedied these issues will lead to false confidence and performance differences between what the Plan believes will happen and what actually happens. If someone would like to see a demo or discuss this further please let me know.

Systems Engineer, Engineering/Program Management -- DoD/Aerospace/IT - Autonomous Systems Air & Ground, FAA Simulation, UAM, V2X, C4ISR, Cybersecurity