Michael DeKort
1 min readJun 26, 2020

--

EXCELLENT YOU ARE THE FIRST AND ONLY remote ops company to be ethically, professionally and technically competent about this.

I would make two points.

This part is technically not correct due to the latency mentioned — “The teleoperator perceives the vehicle’s surroundings through real-time high-definition video and additional sensory data that originate from the vehicle.” — I would say “real-time” is relative to the technical capabilities of the system match to appropriate ODDs. If this were actually “real-time” there would be no technical or ODD issues.

I would also mention that due to the latency motion cues are not available becasue people would get sick. This means many scenarios, especially performance maneuvers and progressive loss of traction situations, cannot be driven properly.

My article on this so folks can understand why the other companies are so reckless

Remote Control for Autonomous Vehicles — A far worse idea than the use of Public “Safety” Driving

https://medium.com/@imispgh/remote-control-for-autonomous-vehicles-a-far-worse-idea-than-the-use-of-public-shadow-safety-df2ad64772c6

--

--

Michael DeKort
Michael DeKort

Written by Michael DeKort

Non-Tribal Truth Seeker-IEEE Barus Ethics Award/9–11 Whistleblower-Aerospace/DoD Systems Engineer/Member SAE Autonomy and eVTOL development V&V & Simulation

Responses (1)