Just last week I wrote an article stating that Eliot was talking people in to committing suicide as autonomous vehicle safety drivers. That was based on an article he wrote last year but reposted recently on Twitter. Now he has doubled down on his grossly negligent, dangerous, unprofessional, unethical, immoral and fraudulent conduct.
This one passage regarding the risks of safety driving says it all
“Are we allowing ourselves to absorb too much risk?
I’ll be further contemplating this matter while ensconced in my steel vault that has protective padding and a defibrillator inside it, just in case there is an earthquake, or I have a heart murmur, or some other calamity arises.”
He is clearly saying that the risks of safety driving are minimal and thinking otherwise is irrational. If you look prior to this he uses math to make the point seem more thought through and objective.
What Eliot does not mention, as before, is it is impossible to drive the one trillion miles or spend over $300B to stumble and restumble on all the scenarios necessary to complete the effort. In addition, the process harms people for no reason. This occurs two ways. The first is through handover or fall back. A process that cannot be made safe for most complex scenarios, by any monitoring and notification system, because they cannot provide the time to regain proper situational awareness and do the right thing the right way, especially in time critical scenarios. The other dangerous area is training the systems to handle accident scenarios. In order do that AV makers will have to run thousands of accident scenarios thousands of times. that will cause thousands of injuries and deaths.
The problem here being that most people, who are already buying the hype, will see yet another “expert” telling them safety driving is relatively safe. That will increase their false confidence levels and further their desire to perform the activity. Putting themselves, their family and the public’s lives at risk needlessly in the process.
Finally let’s think through how this Kamikaze process would work. In order to learn how to avoid or best handle accident scenarios they have to be run though thousands of accident scenarios thousands of times. In order to do that the safety driver cannot disengage. They have to allow the vehicle to almost have or have the accident. They have to literally sacrifice their lives and those in the public who would be impacted (literally). Beyond this the public and those other impacted parties would have to be good with this tens of thousands of times as each AV maker goes though the process. What are the odds this happens? That most safety drivers will become Kamikaze drivers and the world helps them do that? The question is how many people will be killed needlessly until this is stopped. Or most importantly does that first child or family have to die?
“Dr.” Eliot I would like to debate you on this. Pick a medium we can do it live.
(The solution is to switch 99.9% of that public shadow and safety driving to aerospace/DoD simulation technology and systems/safety engineering. Not gaming engine-based systems as they have significant real-time and model fidelity flaws in complex scenarios).
Please find more information on this in my articles below
Dr. Lance Eliot is talking people into fruitless Suicide as Autonomous Vehicle Guinea pigs
Using the Real World is better than Proper Simulation for Autonomous Vehicle Development — NONSENSE
The Hype of Geofencing for Autonomous Vehicles
SAE Autonomous Vehicle Engineering Magazine-End Public Shadow Driving
All the Autonomous Vehicle makers combined would not get remotely close to L4
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 Autonomous Vehicle Industry Participation
- Lead — SAE On-Road Autonomous Driving SAE Model and Simulation Task Force
- Member SAE ORAD Verification and Validation Task Force
- Expert — DIN/SAE International Alliance for Mobility Testing & Standardization (IAMTS) group to create 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